
i m 





% 







^»; 






•^i' 



■y^ 




^■#t ^ 



.9^ 



M^SiMit 



J 



1:1 



JLIylKRICJLlSr 



SOCIALISM AND MONOPOLISM 



cok[^jijl3Te:id, 



BY 



CHARLES CANDEE GREEN 




UTICA, N. Y. 

T, J. GEIFFITHS, PEINTEK, EXCHANGE BUTLDINGS. 
1890. 



<-, 



-''<, 



4- ~^ 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1890, by 
M. E. GEEEN, 

In the office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington. 



INTRODUCTION 



A treatise on the present taxed political status of the 
wages or wealth of "American labor; compared with one, 
as American institutions provide, freeing them from all 
charges for the benefit of private interests or monopolies 
without equivalent : and also from charges of custom 
duty penalties, substantially for revenue only, as under 
tariff restrictions made therefor, that in their nature 
protect incidentally only American landlord monopolies, 
in their political power of exacting bounties or royalties 
in the cost of raw materials, out of the profits that ]Der- 
tain to American labor in the wealth it produces, in 
derogation of the protection due it under American in- 
stitutions. 



FEDEEAL TARIFF RESTRICTIONS, 

EMBEACING THE POLITICAL AND INDUSTRIAL STATUS OF THE 
AMERICAN NEGRO. 

The subject logically involves consideration of the 
rectitude of American political party Federal policy, ap- 
plied as a means for the protection of the natural and po- 
litical rights of American labor, or, as an infringement of 
those rights, already guaranteed protection by American 
institutions. 

Every electoral majority political party in Federal 
power is an incumbent, responsible to American citizen- 
ship for the amount of profits or capital for the purposes 
of national wealth, beyond needs of subsistence, Ameri- 
can industry shall receive for its labor ; by the way its 
political policy affects this industry's political and natu- 
ral rights of free trade. This policy will either facilitate 
the acquisition of wealth in hands of American labor, 
by a protection of its natural rights already acquired as 
a political heritage under the Federal constitution, or 
else it will serve private interests or monopolies, at cost 
or sacrifice of those rights that belong in common to all 
American labor, and therefore cause all American wealth 
to have less actual purchasing power, intrinsic value, 
than American institutions unviolated, provides it shall 
have in the possession of this labor. This protection of 
private interests or monopolies, in special privileges by 
a paternal government, that enables them to absorb the 
profits of labor as their own capital, must inevitably re- 



6 

suit that this charge or cost of such protection comes 
out of the wealth of American labor as pure penalties — 
without any free trade conditions — with only arbitrary 
conditions, and therefore without recompense to Ameri- 
can toil. This thereby lowers the value of the wealth 
American labor shall have political right to possess, and 
even that wealth to be, not free from the political entail- 
ment of a perpetual debt of usury. 

A political party that makes laws to exact any charges 
or x^enalties whatever out of the wealth of American 
labor, for benefit of private interest or monopolies, with- 
out any equivalent or co-operative return, is false to its 
trust to execute the law of the Federal relation for full 
protection from the oppression of this labor by any such 
charges or penalties. 

The party policy of Federal restrictions on free use or 
trade of its own wealth by American labor, these inflict- 
ing without benefit, only charges or penalties, transfers 
by exercise of irresponsible, imperial power of the Fed- 
eral relation, not derived from the States, the profits 
produced by American labor — lawfully its own capital — 
to a protected income class, thereby removing all the 
power of the States, to protect the wealth of their citi- 
zens from depredation by a force that is alien to the 
realm and American institutions. 

Such an income class is, by this party policy, made 
into a politically protected monopoly, invested with 
power to absorb all the capital of the nation without any 
return or obligation. It is constituted with power to 
hold this wealth — not in trust as national capital, sub- 
ject to the law for the benefit of the commonwealth but 
— for its own uses of oppression, all laid on American 



labor, which, by the venal vote and its own, it has as- 
sumed to bear. 

This party policy leaves American labor without any 
protection of its vested political rights, but only in a 
political condition of an oppressed, assaulted, poor, un- 
provided, servile class, because of being compelled to 
support a ruling income aristocracy, as an established 
precedent and condition, regardless of the political rights 
of protection due it under American institutions ; this 
policy furnishing no precedent of American labor being 
the income class of the nation, as American institutions 
have provided ; and as such, holding in trust the polit- 
ical liberties of labor, to be handed down to future gen- 
erations as the Magna Charta of American institutions 
— the only foundation on which a superstructure can be 
built, that will stand the friction of ages. 

Any party maintaining such a policy of restrictions is 
an enemy of x4.merican labor and a friend of monopoly 
oppressions. It would have a political status of aristoc- 
racy of wealth, and a servile, dependent, toiling labor 
class. 

Legislation conforming to American institutions, must 
have for its purpose the establishment of a political con- 
dition of self-interest in each producer, in being co-op- 
erative with all others. Every one must be protected 
alike by the power of the civil law. Each one must 
labor in harmony with his co-laborer, to enable all to 
be fairly co-operative and every one have profits for 
labor. American labor must be without toil and op- 
pression. It must possess the wealth of the nation. 
Federal legislation must not favor a political condition 
in which one class of consumers, who are equally capa- 



8 

ble of being producers, are enabled to live on tlie toil of 
all the rest, Antbout compensation for that toil, leaving a 
toiling class to be in a poor, degraded, defenseless con- 
dition, only robbed, not protected, by civil law. 

The natural, intrinsic value of wealth, which includes 
profits, is the one that American labor has the political 
right to be protected in possessing if it produces it, 
by the contract of the Federal relation. 

American institutions, defined by the rule of the Fed- 
eral constitution, declare only that the laborer is worthy 
of his hire. There are no qualifications abridging this 
right. There was once a qualification, that was, the 
law of slavery. 

The protection of this right must be pre-eminently to 
induce American industrial co-operation in the produc- 
tion for itself of profits or capital, by its freedom from 
all restrictions that depreciate the natural value of its 
wealth. 

Under the Federal constitution, American labor is the 
only rightful possessor of the profits or capital arising 
from its production of wealth. The poKcy of the party 
in power denies this lawful right. 

It is the duty of American labor, by its vote, to de- 
mand that no party in poAver shall have a policy, or dare 
to legislate not subserviently to this right. No political 
combination in poAver shall make statutes impairing this 
already politically guaranteed right of labor, by with- 
holding the free use of the natural sources of wealth, as 
the lawful means for employment by American labor to 
secure for itself the profits of the wealth it produces. 

It will be maintained herein that this political right 
of labor has been flagrantly violated, more or less, since 



9 

the foundation of the Federal government. The orig- 
inal governments of the States were empowered to pro- 
tect the right of American labor to have free trade at 
home, in the use of its own natural monopolies, also 
abroad, for its own products therefrom, which secured 
profits to labor. American political duty is to protect 
thus, in securing to American labor the best wao-es or 
most wealth in. the world, after having produced them. 

The Federal government forbids legislation, compel- 
ing American labor to produce wealth that others may 
possess the profits, and thus leave it to be only a poor, 
degraded, servile, dependent labor. It requires this to 
elevate the general condition of its labor. 

American Federal institutions, designed by their pro- 
tective power to secure American industry more wealth 
or capital for its own labor, than that to any other labor 
whose government appropriated wealth without consent 
of producers, to support a more politically protected and 
privileged income class. 

American industry uniting, under colonial representa- 
tion, for co-operation of its own labor and caj^ital, es- 
tablished its political right to be free, independent and 
self-employed, to thereby produce for itself ample 
wealth. This was to be distributed to every member of 
its political society, in the amount he produced, without 
any exception or reservation whatever. This political 
right, that labor is worthy of its hire, was obtained by a 
severance of all political connections with the British em- 
pire, which then did, and still does, tax penalties out of 
the wealth of its own labor, so that it is not co-operative 
and self-employed, but a dependent, toiling mass — a 
class employed under political coercion, for the imperial 



10 

purpose of supporting a class on income without anj 
production of wealth by it, its government forcing labor 
to accept a bare subsistence for endless toil, throughout 
its generations, under duress for its necessities, of more 
than natural human endurance, it becoming therefore as 
its abnormal, second nature, a degraded, servile, vicious, 
under-bred class, not from natural causes, but by means 
of wrongful political oppression. American labor is 
practically in the same condition, tending downward. 

There was a political infringement on the natural 
rights of American labor to the free trade in its own 
wealth, that led to the Eevolution. It was intended, by 
a British imperial system of over and unequal taxation 
of its labor only, this to be shared by the American sys- 
tem, that there should be less wealth as the freehold of 
American labor. Its foreign exchanges were to be taxed^ 
The profits of American labor were to be appropriated 
thereby for the support of her income aristocracies, al- 
though nominally for revenue, but this revenue enabled 
the monopoly accumulations to remain untouched, which 
amounted to the same thing. 

It was intended to be established, as a British prece- 
dent of imperial taxation of profits out of the wealth 
produced by American industrv, without its consent^ 
while it was still too weak to resist might over its natural 
rights. American industry then demanded uncompro- 
mised rights of free trade at home and abroad in its own 
products — that they be not burdened with tariff for rev- 
enue charges on them. This would prevent their secur- 
ing full value to the labor producing them. American 
labor then fought the revolution, that profits be forever 
after throughout its generations the capital of itself, to 



11 

make it a free inclnstry, for all its own co-operative uses 
and gains. American industry, of the revolutionary age, 
would not be confined to a market, whose demand for 
its own products was destroyed by political restrictions 
— a condition to which the present ruling party policy 
controlling Federal relations compels it to now submit* 
American labor, being protected from paying its profits 
as foreign tribute, that would lessen the value of the 
wealth it produced to it, and limit its acquisition of co- 
operative capital by restricting its freedom in use for 
greater acquisition, through the fundamental law of the 
revolution ; shall it not be protected from every charge 
on its Avealth at home, in the nature of bounties to 
American landlord monopolies for use of their freeholds 
to obtain American necessary raw materials, for produc-^ 
tion of American labor's own capital, to use for its own 
co-operation, to thereby enable it to have ma-nufactures 
for its exports, instead of raw materials that are a home 
drug. These resources are exclusively American labor's 
own natural monopolies. They are, however, in \dola- 
tion of American labor's State rights, held as imperial. 
Federal monopolies, restricting the common rights of 
property, and their free use by American labor. This 
monopoly denies American labor its political rights to use 
its own sources of wealth. Shall this labor therefore 
demand, by its vote, that it be reinstated and protected 
in its original rights to the free trade or use of its own 
sources of wealth, to obtain from them the necessary 
means or materials for its profitable employment — by 
the policy of removing tariff and all other monopoly re- 
strictions on American free trade in foreign raw mater- 
ials, to thereby suppress all American monopolies ? or; 



12 

•sliall it submit to loss of its liberties, by a venal vote 
paired off against its own ? 

For American labor, to secure its own capital — and 
relieve itself from tlie charge of interest for the use of 
credit for currency, obtained from Federal monopolies 
— to cheapen the cost, and thereby produce manufac- 
tures and ships for its own foreign commerce, it is nec- 
essary that it be protected from charges for support 
of American landlord monopolies, who will spend this 
wealth in Europe. It must organize and vote to remove 
the fundamental cause, that is, tariff restrictions from 
free use of foreign raw materials. This will protect 
American labor from being shut out of its foreign free 
trade in profitable products ; by monopolists who do not 
want American labor to be independent and have free 
trade, but only that the law shall compel it to support 
an income class by bounties charged in prices on all its 
necessities, letting imported necessities be provided by 
a foreign commerce, no matter how poor this leaves 
American labor. 

This political policy of American free trade in raw 
materials without any exception, to thereby enable its 
labor to secure the profits of foreign commerce, and in- 
dependent wealth to itself, is a necessity, since all re- 
•strictions bv charges, in the nature of penalties forced 
out of this labor, has only resulted in its losing its 
wealth, getting into debt, to be forever employed by 
monopolies at the poor wages of bare subsistence, using 
their credit for its currency, on perpetual interest. 

The fact that imported raw material must pay foreign 
freight, insurance and exchange, is enough protection of 
•American natural monopohes, since American society 



13 

charged nothing for them, if the capital of their im- 
provements is made also free from all charges in the 
nature of penalties on its cost.- 

American laborers, or manufacturers of wealth, who 
have no natural resources , from which to obtain raw ma- 
terials necessary for their own self-employment, and to 
thereby employ operatives as co-laborers, are those to 
require the absolute protection of their own free trade,, 
to thereby acquire what they do not possess, but need, 
to secure the requisite national wealth in hands of in- 
dustry. This is to protect all American labor equally, 
none being subject to charges for bounties to monopo^ 
lies of American sources of wealth — to those whom 
American society has given exclusive right of natural 
resources to labor with and produce wealth from, for 
their own use. This tenure must not have protection of 
the law in asking more than another is willing to take 
with free foreign competition. 

Free raw materials are necessary, if they are required 
to produce equally good wages for American labor not 
possessed of its own sources of wealth, as those who do 
possess the natural monopoly to portions of American 
resources. This is a Federal right of all American labor, 
to preserve its equality, and not require more toil of one 
citizen than another to possess the same wealth, putting 
every family on a political equality. This free trade is 
necessary to protect labor's equality politically. One 
American citizen shall have as much right as another to 
use the means to provide by labor the needs of his fam- 
ily. One family is as good as another in the eyes of the 
American law, unless that law gets a black eye, in being 
violated by a political sectional policy. The American 



u 

laborer wlio by his own free trade acquires raw mater- 
ials, is not obliged to pay royalties for support of an 
American landlord income aristocracy, under American 
institutions. He therefore can produce as much wealth 
as the laberer who produces them from his freehold of 
American natural monopolies. 

There are, by American institutions, no entailments 
on the natural resources of any part of the globe — since 
the emancipation from British rule and of American 
slaves — to which American industry must pay the least 
tribute for the privilege of holding all the wealth it can 
produce. After that wealth is produced there are by 
the law of American protection, no charges to come out 
of that wealth in form of enhanced cost of subsistence, 
to support income classes. American labor has right of 
free trade to protect itself from these charges, yet it 
actually pays them. 

The law of its free trade is infringed. This infringe- 
ment has forced American labor to take such poor wages 
that it is servile and poor. It does not draw a breath 
of free air. If it gets a poor income from any bonded 
capital it possesses, through parsimony, this income is 
obliged to pay for the subsistence of the owner more 
than will be due American labor for producing it. The 
difference goes to income aristocracy. There is there- 
fore no free wealth belonging to American citizens in 
the American empire. All the national wealth is bond- 
ed to these charges of perpetual debt or enhanced cost 
of living. It only escapes this bondage by resting 
abroad, its owners loaning credit to impoverished Amer- 
ican industry, to draw interest for its use, to be spent in 
Europe. 



15 

Pennsylvania land monopolists, for an example, have 
no right to charge bounties on the wealth that the labor 
of New York produces, because it prevents this labor 
accumulating the wealth the Federal relation provides 
it shall be free to have. It could make no profits for it- 
self unless it had free use of these sources of wealth, or 
some others that were good substitutes. The people of 
New York represented in the Federal relation as a State 
never consented to have the Federal power exercised to 
debar this right. This is no free inter-State trade. 
Who does not recognize equal right of the labor of New 
York, debars a political right of the labor of New York 
and Pennsylvania to co-operate for mutual profit. The 
representatives of New York labor and the venal vote 
combined, in the Federal relation have sold those Fed- 
eral liberties of free trade belonging to her labor for 
spoils of Federal office. This barter has provided Fed- 
eral honors for distinguished citizens of New York, as 
the price of this political status established by the gov- 
ernment of the Federal relations at "Washington, without 
proper regard for the rights of New York labor, which 
was to be free to co-operate with the labor of Pennsyl- 
vania. It was not to be compelled to pay bounties for 
raw materials to any Pennsylvania landlord aristocracy 
which imported contract and servile labor to provide 
those raw materials. 

The political protection of American labor in the nat- 
ural rights of acquiring all the profits of the wealth it 
produces is, under American institutions, secured by 
permitting individual and corporate tenure of natural 
resources, without binding their possessors with any 
restrictions in their use as homes, farms, mines, quarries ^ 



16 

manufactories, railroads, canals, cities, harbors, &c. 
London as contrasted with New York pays ground rent- 
als to lordships. Her wealth is worth less, hence it 
seeks foreign landed properties to draw income from. 
It was intended that there should be a more free, unre- 
stricted-by-society production of wealth, of American 
raw materials, so that there would be an abundance of 
employment for American labor to produce wealth in 
new forms therefrom. This free trade principle protects 
the accumulation of unlimited wealth in the hands of 
American labor, and adds no taxation with increase of 
wealth. 

The land was not to be held by monopoly landlord 
rights, which would thereby compel American labor to re- 
ceive only poor wages and always be poor, limiting its 
opportunities to produce wealth for itself by limiting 
supply of raw material. This tenant from the govern^ 
ment, by this control, could compel American labor, if 
tariff restrictions made a monopoly of his resources, to 
work all the harder and get less, the support of the 
landlord keeping him poor. The more American labor 
can be oppressed by these conditions, the more wealth 
accrues to the landlord — the less to American labor. 

The Federal relation invites immigration only of blood 
relationship, which is imbued with the Christian princi- 
ples of liberty, of capabilities for co-operation, of accu- 
mulation for more than its present needs. 

American political principles require that its labor 
shall be capable of self-government, to be able to per- 
petuate its liberties and own the national wealth, by a 
proper performance of its voting duties. 

It is not intended that the immigration, which is an 



17 

alien, anti-Christian, unaffiliating, dependent, servile, 
anti-co-operative industry, shall enjoy the privileges of 
American citizenship, without a performance of co-op- 
erative industry, it seeking wealth only to expatriate it, 
in opposition to American institutions ; its religious 
creed teaching it to serve superstitions, and thereby de- 
velop ignorance, from debasing practices, which renders 
it incapable of self-government, and forbids it to obey 
the law of co-operation, which American institutions 
alone recognize. 

There is a modern instance justifying these conclu- 
sions. It will be impossible for politically free Ameri- 
can industry to live in contact with Mongolian labor, 
which voluntarily retains its servile conditions, and re- 
fuses to educate itself and accept political freedom. - It 
only serves monopoly. The religious practices of the 
latter make it too servile, even within the protection of 
free institutions. It cares nothing for them. Its relig- 
ious superstition teaches not to accept free labor rights. 
It is inexoribly inert. It acquires no power to elevate 
itself, but becomes a servant to vice. It is undeveloped, 
unchanged through generations. It does not recognize 
the natural conditions of the family relation. It is sub- 
ject to monopolies only. It does not prize liberty. It 
only wishes to be left alone in its degradation. 

American industry would have to devise and develop 
all the public and private improvements. It would have 
to make all the foreign exchanges necessary to its own 
elevation, getting no contribution or co-operation from 
Mongolian industry, only its dead weight. Mongolian 
labor would only avail itself of these privileges to ab- 



18 

sorb wealth for building up Asiatic from depletion of 
American accumulations. 

There is no mutuality, hence there can be no co-op- 
eration or compromise. The removal of Mongolian is 
an absolute necessity to freedom of American industry, 
and self -protection of its own capital from hostile depre- 
dation. Mongolian industry is a moral leprosy with no 
cure. The fact of its existence on American soil is evi- 
dence of the servile political conditions of American 
labor. Monopoly interests alone retain it. It could not 
compete with free labor. It must reform and co-operate 
with it, or become extinct. 

Under American institutions, no part of American in- 
dustry was to be classified by political and social strata, 
nor be unprovided, poor or oppressed, because not pos- 
sessing land. It was not to live subject to penalties on 
its existence from any political conditions, in this land 
flowing with sources of wealth. 

There was no fear among our forefathers but that the 
production of raw materials would exist, and would pro- 
vide employment enough to produce competent wealth 
to American industry by the use of them, if they were 
to be made politically free, by not empowering the hold- 
ers to overcharge for them. 

Both the laboring land holder and the laborer or man- 
ufacturer without its possession were then to be pro- 
tected in having gold coin to be legal tender, as the 
invariable unit of measure of the values of all products, 
as a right, to preserve to it the value of wealth to labor. 

The free use or trade in silver as lawful Federal 
money, the use designed for it, without being a unit of 
measure however, its proper office, is also destroyed. 



19 

The policies of restrictions on the free trade of Ameri- 
can labor have been planned to establish an income 
aristocracy of commercial wealth at cost of American 
industry. There is established a condition like the Whig 
aristocracy of Great Britain, which was done by the es- 
tablishment of legal tender currency of the Bank of 
England, the great issuer and contractor at its own will 
of the supply of money currency, the great British vari- 
able standard of measure of value of all products that 
are subject to British foreign commerce. 

The promoters of the Cobden Club free trade princi- 
ples compose this British Whig aristocracy of wealth. 
They advocate their particular system of free trade in 
American markets, for products owned by British mo- 
nopolies. The bait, to rob American labor of its wealth 
as a substitute for the way the policy of the party in 
power is doing it, is the less cost of manufactures to 
American consumers than their present enhanced cost. 
These are made by British servile labor, and cost mo- 
nopolies only the subsistence of that labor. The condi- 
tions of such free trade are that American labor shall 
not manufacture its own raw materials. 

American labor wants no free trade mth Great Brit- 
ain, or any other country whose government refuses 
protection of its own labor in having the profits it pro- 
duces. This protection of foreign labor in retaining the 
wealth it produces would protect American labor in se- 
curing good wages by mutual free trade, because foreign 
industry, owning the capital it produces, would be 
wealthy enough to give in exchange as good as it re- 
ceived, thereby co-operating with American labor in its 
energies to secure wealth. The whole object of tariff 



20 

restrictions should only be protective of securing wealth 
to American labor of all kinds, including the farmer^ 
miner, manufacturer, merchant and common carrier alike. 

The only way for States to be protected on an equality 
under the Federal relation as to the rights of their in- 
dustry, is to exercise the power of tariff restrictions on 
imported manufactures made by servile labor. This 
will give American labor the protection it must have to 
retain its own co-operative benefits — both the labor that 
is in exclusive possession of American sources for pro- 
ducing manufactures, and that which must acquire raw 
materials by free trade wherewith to manufacture, if 
American landlords demand monopoly prices. 

This will give all grades of American industry profit- 
able employment. It will destroy all monopolies that 
would restrict the ownership of profits or capital by 
American labor for its own co-operative gain, to have it 
for use to cheapen the cost of its products. 

Looking for precedents — since monopoly advocates, 
in congressional speeches, cite only bad ones, established 
by fraud and trespass on the rights of American labor — 
it may be pertinently asked whether or not w^ere Ameri- 
can land holders in such a majority as Federal repre- 
sentatives, for establishment of American institutions, as 
to be able to dictate the political powers of landholders, 
the rights of American labor, and terms of immigration ? 
Could they not decide whether American labor should 
be free or servile ? Whether or not it should be subject 
to a political status, like its previous condition in Eu- 
rope, that of dependency for employment at only wages 
of bare subsistence upon monopoly of natural resources 
or other monopolies, as a tenantry class ? Did not these 



21 

land -holding Federal representatives choose to have 
labor's domicil in America, if without voluntary tenure 
of natural resources, free to secure other means for pro- 
ducing its own wealth — that of importing raw materials 
free ?' 

Were not all to be equally protected in a monopoly of 
the home market for manufactures made by American 
labor ? Were there any restrictions that would debar 
from producing free American homes ? Was not free 
raw materials made the sources of free American labor's 
wealth ? Was not labor to be the foundation of Ameri- 
can wealth ? 

Was not the actual cost for obtaining private posses- 
sion of natural resources made so low as to cause it to 
cover only the expense of the survey, evidence of title, 
defense against Indians, public improvements, &c. ? 
Was not the cost of raw materials to be enough only to 
furnish natural profits for use of the improvements and 
the labor using them to produce raw materials there- 
from ? 

Was it ever intended that a combination of possessions 
of ore and coal beds with timber tracts should, after 
costing a certain sum for improvements, including pri- 
vate approaches, be capitalized on the basis of royal 
landlord estates, rendering income for generations to 
come, for a great many profits on the cost of these im- 
provements, making the price of raw materials there- 
from to be enough more than the natural value of good 
wages to prevent the use of American ships and manu- 
factures for American foreign commerce ? 

Were not Clinton, Lansing and other representatives 
of the State of New York afraid to trust the competency 



22 

of the people for self-government, like the democracy of 
Athens, lest they would ignorantly or dishonestly neglect 
to conform to any constitution that might be made under 
the Federal relation for the protection of the natural 
rights and free trade in use of the natural monopolies 
pertaining to the different States' industries ? Were 
they not afraid that private local interests would be 
powerful enough to convert the Federal government into 
an irresponsible imperial power over the labor of the 
States, to thereby prevent State liberty of free trade and 
shut off the foreign trade of New York ? 

Have not the fears of these representatives been justi- 
fied ? Has not the liberties of free trade belonging to 
the industry of New York been restricted ? Has not the 
accumulation of wealth been less on account of her in- 
dustry getting poorer profits under the restrictions put 
over New York by Federal power to subserve private 
interests r Has not her wealth been less under the 
Federal relation without having free trade^ rights, than 
it would have been ? 

Were these patriots not afraid of infringement on the 
original rights belonging to the States, of free trade to 
obtain raw materials, and that this would prevent the 
industry of New York having its most profitable employ- 
ment — its foreign commerce? 

Has not the policy of the party in power forced the 
Federal relation to violate its own contract of protection, 
in that it has deprived not only New York but every 
other State of the right to protect State industries in se- 
curing the profits of their labor to develop their own 
manufactures with ; by restricting free use of natural 
sources of wealth ? Has not this been done in order to 



23 

protect private interests or monopolies that are alien to 
the co-operative principles affirmed by the Declaration 
of Independence, the Constitution of the United States 
of America, and Washington's farewell address ? 

Does not the national compact or treaty of unlimited 
free trade by the independ^it industries of the several 
States between themselves, and by each one for itself 
abroad, require the duty of protection cf this free trade 
by the government of the Federal relation, to thereby 
extend co-operative American foreign commerce in the 
manufactures of American industry, for direct, natural, 
suitable foreign products of subsistence, as well as raw 
materials, and to intertrade with neutral nations and 
States ? Was it intended that such free trade should 
ever be fettered ? Was not tariff restrictions designed 
to protect American free trade, by restricting the foreign ? 

Such restrictions on American rights of labor make a 
Federal tariff to be, not for incidental protection of this 
labor, with its penalties to come out of income wealth 
for the fiscal revenue only. They are made for the sole, 
imperial party policy of taxing the wealth of American 
labor in penalties to be taken out of their profits, by 
being charged on their necessities, to thereby obtain the 
fiscal revenue. This political condition denies the right 
of labor to be free from taxation without consent or 
equivalent. It makes it to be only the servile subject 
of taxation to support a power whose life is drawn from 
robbing American labor of its capital. 

Such restrictions on American free trade are only a 
protection of American landlord monopoly power over 
American labor. The tariff collects all the revenue out 
of labor only. It is in principle like the British system 



24 

of restrictions on the efforts of industry to acquire wealth 
by labor. It is a taxation on the necessities of the 
workingmen, lest they become extravagant and dissatis- 
fied with their present political status. 

Such restrictions on American free trade, force to an 
abnormally large export of unprohtable wealth of silver, 
copper, wheat, cotton, hops, &c., all of which are taxed 
in cost of production, only to benefit American landlord 
monopolies, the enhanced cost of living thereby alone 
preventing American manufacture. 

Tariff restrictions on free trade in American wealth 
always entail on American labor a deprivation of the 
profits, a concentration of the wealth American labor 
produces, into the power of monopolies, coupled with a 
perpetual debt of principle, involving penalties of usury, 
owing by American labor, to thereby establish a politi- 
cal condition of a degraded, rather than a free, enlight- 
ened American industry ; always also entail an income 
class, as an imperial power over American personal lib- 
erty — without any equivalent therefor. 

These result in an un-Christian, helpless, degraded, 
toiling class, with only oppressive circumstances attend- 
ing this violation of the contract, constitution and law 
of the Federal relation. 

The party in power has always been full of imperial 
tendencies, in that it has established monopolies of 
credit, to be the only currency of exchange within reach 
of American labor. Credit for currency is very good, 
but a monopol}- of it is very bad. Its purpose is to es- 
tabhsh commerce into a monopoly, engaged in scalping 
profits out of American labor as fast as they are pro- 
duced, leaving it only a bare subsistence. This credit 



25 

for currency supplants the use of legal tender as the 
unit of values of all other wealth, making gold to be a 
commercial commodity only, of variable market value, 
not subject to the law of supply and demand. 

There may be a condition of using bank notes or bills 
of exchange as a circulation of credit to facilitate ex- 
change. To be a public good, these must be unrestrict- 
ed in issue ; not a monopoly and thereby a power to 
drive out the standard of gold for determining values — 
the baser driving the better currency out of circulation. 

There could not, however, be a monopoly of credit 
floated for currency under the protection of free trade, 
co-operative industry, because this industry would use 
its own greenbacks for currency until it became able to 
retire them. Being therefore rich, there would be no 
complaint of scarcity of money. Any scarcity of money 
with American labor arises from being debarred free 
trade to get full value for its products and thereby keep 
out of debt. 

There is one difference between British and American 
industries. The former supports a limited class of aris- 
tocracy at home. American industry supports one at 
home and one abroad. 

Although both American and British labors are in a 
servile condition, getting only bare subsistence, yet 
American wealth is more heavily charged in bounties 
and penalties, and thereby there is a constant transfer- 
ence ot it to Europe. 

Governments cannot bestow a particular paternal pro- 
tection, that is not a monopoly that taxes its own labor's 
wealth, thereby protecting neutral markets for the bene- 
fit of foreign commerce. It operates to keep industry 
too poor to have any foreign commerce. 



26 

The governments of the American States, and that 
over Ireland, for example, are both subject to landlord 
monopolies, but by different methods. The industry of 
neither has any foreign exchange, to speak of. 

It may be asked then, why Great Britain has any for- 
eign commerce, since she also has only a servile industry 
and protects only landlord monopolies. 

The aggregate of bounties and penalties are less than 
in America because imported raw materials are free, and 
those from her own lordships get less bounties than 
those in America. Less than in Ireland, because land- 
lord entailments are not so servile a tax on labor. The 
freeholds of the North of Ireland save it enough from 
bounty taxation to have a foreign commerce in manufac- 
tures from the materials digenious to the vicinity. There 
is no fear of competition from American foreign com- 
merce, since the present tariff restrictions cause the 
landlord tax to be heavier than in Great Britain and 
Ireland. 

In the United States, Canada, Mexico and other Amer- 
ican States, Asia and Africa, monopolies are rulers. Of 
course the industries of all these countries are servile, 
consequently they have no foreign commerce, being in 
debt to foreign interests, delivering their profits, as fast 
as made, to monopolies. They have no capital with 
which to manufacture or carry on a foreign commerce. 
The industries of these countries of course get only sub- 
sistence for their labor, and therefore are universally 
poor. If any of them have possession of wealth, the 
charges on it are so heavy that they have no control of 
it to co-operate with their labor, to so cheapen produc- 
tion as to be able to export. 



27 

The only real protection is that which will injure no 
one, by its protection of all alike, and that must be from 
all charges that lender no return of profits to labor — pro- 
tection from all restrictions on its free trade — from all 
except mutual conditions, to get profits or wealth. 

Taking the duty from wool, tin or any other products, 
leaving it on other raw materials that protect American 
landlord monopolies of any kind, is no protection of the 
producers of wool, tin or of any other American labor. 
The existing monopolies get all the profits or capital of 
American production. So long as any exist, these wdll 
be dictator, and American industry will be compelled to 
work for bare subsistence. 

The changed condition will make the cost of living 
cheaper, and will give more employment and more man- 
ufactures will be exported, but at enough lower prices 
to offset the cheaper cost of living. The prices or value 
of silver, copper, iron, lead, wheat, cotton, wool, &g., 
will go down, but the profits from bounties on iron, coal, 
lumber, &c., will be all the tariff restrictions provide — 
enough to absorb the profits of American labor. Immi- 
gration Tvill only increase without profit to American 
labor. Its condition will be only worse as population 
increases. It will never get out of a perpetual condition 
of debt. The enhanced cost of living will absorb all its 
profits. 

It will never do for American labor to permit political 
majorities by conceding monopolies to some sections. 
The whole tariff on coal, ore, lumber, grain, hops, vege- 
tables, &c., must be abated. Relief from present bond- 
age is, to make all American natural resources free to 
compete with the world, in selling raw materials to 
American labor. 



28 

There must be no monopolies of American natural 
resources, either owned at home, or as is too much the 
case, by aliens to thereby tax American labor out of its 
profits. There then being no charges on wealth, thereby 
absorbing its profits, savings or capital for royalties, 
labor will then become well off, and living at home will 
be cheap. There will be a better demand for American 
wealth. American raw materials as a form of capital 
will then be co-operative. The owners of land tenures 
will get more wealth, than their bounty priced raw ma- 
terials would come to, rather than permit foreign raw 
materials to supplant their use. The same area of land- 
lord resource will be worth more in national wealth as 
iin aggregate whether in America or Ireland, for example. 

With the protection of American labor — in its political 
rights to the wealth it produces, as the Federal relation 
provides it shall have, it will wrest the foreign commerce 
of the world in neutral markets, presuming competition 
will continue with only the products of servile labor. 

American labor has its guaranteed rights — to a home 
market for its products — destroyed to suit the gain of 
private interest only. Its wheat, cotton, meat, hops, 
barley, cheese, &c., are exported as raw materials, in- 
stead of American labor being permitted to find occupa- 
tion making them into manufactures for its own profit. 
By forcing one class of labor to export its raw materials, 
because its natural home market is destroyed, bounties 
are secured to landlord monopolies and poor wages to 
American labor of all classes. To export American 
manufactures would be, to bring profits beyond subsist- 
ence to American industry but no bounties to landlord 
monopolies. American labor is denied its political rights 



29 

to make such products as would keep it out of all foreign 
debt, by getting more wealth for less labor at home, with 
which to pay foreign exchanges. It would produce more 
at home and buy less abroad, except as its increased 
wealth enabled it to profit by foreign exchange. 

How then can American free labor get good wages out 
of its manufactures competing for foreign trade in neu- 
tral markets, if British products are made at lower 
wages ? 

In the first place, if American labor had free trade 
from bounties for its products, raw materials would be 
used at home, except a few natural export exchanges. 
The absence of these that only glut British markets, 
would compel .British monopoly to pay more for the 
smaller supply in its market, making its manufactures to 
cost more. America could dictate the price of American 
surplus exports like cotton. 

In the second place, British labor must be supported, 
although in poverty, and its aristocracy in affluence. 
American labor will have both these provisions for it- 
self, making it a free, rich industry, yet underselling 
British monopoly at least for its own foreign exchanges. 
This also makes the aggregate of wealth to be greater 
to the nation having free labor, because the producers 
are in greater ratio to consumers. 

The foreign commerce having to pay the least penal- 
ties without profit, will have the inside track in a race 
free for all for trade among neutral nations. In this 
case American labor will get the prize, if it will only 
dispense with the inert weight of monopoly. 

American labor must now cease production of manu- 
factures for export. 



30 

It must overcrowd the labor market, causing two re- 
stricted laborers to run after one restricted employer, 
competing at underbid wages against themselves for the 
chance to produce raw materials, with no natural — but a 
low priced — demand abroad ; exhausting American 
sources of wealth, not only having no profits to show for 
it, but a foreign debt. 

If American industrial society had an opportunit}' to 
migrate in a body, it could not find a purchaser for all 
the national wealth for which it is bonded as trustee, 
including lighthouses, harbors, cities, railroads, farms, 
mines, manufactories, &c., with the liens on them for all 
the obligations it has assumed, coupled with its present 
conditions to produce wealth, for any price whatever. 
The reason it might bring something is, that the land of 
the globe is held as a monopoly, and would be bought 
to give employment at poor, rather than have no wealth. 
A free industry would prefer free natural resources with- 
out any wealth at all, as the Boers began in South Af- 
rica. Every dollar then earned would have full value to 
labor. American wealth has no value to its labor. Mo- 
onpolies have all the profit there is in it. In other 
words, the present national wealth is not worth having 
as a gift, under its present control. The industry buy- 
ing it would remain poor earning interest to pay its 
debts, before earning its living. 

The educated and developed American skilled laborer 
or manufacturer, who would merge his labor with the 
co-operative use of silver, copper, lead, iron, wheat, 
wool, hemp, tobacco, barley, hops, cotton, cheese, <fcc., 
is denied a foreign free trade market for his manufac- 
tures, including railroad equipment, because tariff pro- 



31 

tectecl monopolies demand that lie shall charge the 
bounties they receive, on foreign consumers as his re- 
coupment for the wrongs done by the oppressions on 
his labor by his own government for monopoly's gain. 
He would be glad to make these forms of co-operative 
capital into manufactures, and thereby make a free 
trade home market for wheat, cotton, silver, &c., but 
cannot charge bounties on foreign consumers, therefore 
must have poor wages or profits, supplying a limited 
home market to impoverished labor, that is 'employed 
only part of the time, at low wages. He must work for 
bare subsistence or perish. He must }deld up all his 
profits, without even a " ticket of leave " from this bond- 
age of perpetual debt. His bondage is for life, and this 
is all the heritage he grants his children. Monopolies 
shall be protected in holding the ore, coal, lumber and 
other raw materials he must have, therefore he cannot 
make ships and manufactures for foreign commerce. 

Sometimes the plethoric monopolist gives a public 
library, plant for school of manual training or other 
benefaction. This is highly commendable, but the law 
interferes, however, and requires American labor to toil, 
until it is too degraded to profit by such benefactions, 
producing the wealth from which they come. What 
good is intelligence and knowledge to American labor, 
if its political lot is to live under servile, dependent 
conditions ? Why did our forefathers leave Europe ? 
Monopoly only gets the benefits of the technical schools. 
Monopolists are not to blame. It is American labor for 
permitting such things to be done, by not performing its 
duty in the free use of its vote. It must never surren- 
der it to monopolies to be paired off with the venal vote. 



32 

American labor has, however, empowered the present 
political majority to make a contract of foreign ex- 
change, guaranteed by the Federal government's pledge 
of the wealth of the nation, whereby it agrees to stay at 
home, and work to support an aristocracy of monopolies, 
and have no free trade manufactures of its own produc- 
tion, .because of not having any co-operative free trade 
capital. It humbly lets monopolies have all and is told 
by their lackeys, that this is keeping up public credits. 

American labor, by its vote says that monopolies may 
have all its profits, and spend them in Europe, it being 
content with the political privilege of a poor subsist- 
ence, its family provision being left to go to waste. 
Such a Christian estate is too high for American labor 
to presume to attain. Monopoly would have it to herd 
like dumb brutes. 

American labor must not have, any foreign exchange 
of its own, because this would cause monopolies to suffer 
what the party in power causes it to suffer for the sake 
of monopoly rule ; until paralyzed with its suffering, it 
in its despair almost believes its condition is natural, 
and Creative law not all beneficence, when in fact by its 
vote it shows that " man is only vile." 

British commercial monopolies — scalping values out 
of the products that the present political policy has 
driven into this foreign power, to thereby establish 
Cobden Club principles of free trade, founded only on 
servile labor conditions — can undersell the American 
laborer or manufacturer, who is loaded down with 
charges, in order to keep this condition of servility as a 
perpetual condition, and his industry be always a de- 
pendent, helpless infant. 



33 

He is not jDermitted to air himself iu foreign climes, 
where he could pay his expenses in selling his manu- 
factures for tea, coffee, hides, &c. He must tread in 
the same mill, imported from Europe, that his ancestry 
tread in, until by the war of the American Revolution 
they released themselves from all political obligation to 
submit any more to such bondage, having sent all tread- 
mills of human toil back to Europe, only to be restored 
by the policy elected to rule over American labor. 

Expatriated products, that have cost American blood, 
sweat and toil, consisting partly of metals, grain, cotton, 
<fcc., buy more tea, coffee, &c., for American labor, if it 
puts them at a low valuation in the hands of foreign 
monopolies, than if they are converted into American 
manufactures by domesticated monopolies — that is, so 
far as American labor gets any profit by its toil. Why 
does not American labor vote to protect the profits it 
makes in its own hands, as its own capital to co-operate 
thereby in making its own manufactures, and have noth- 
ing to do with monopolies either naturalized or foreign? 
Why does it vote to protect monopolies by permitting 
them to absorb all of its profits ? Is a paid-for Presi- 
dential hoorah and frolic a sufficient compensation ? 
Has American labor any right to thus sacrifice its her- 
itage of liberty, tha,t it only holds in trust for posterity ? 
Monopolies have taught American labor to laugh at the 
idea of considering such things. 

If American laborers or manufacturers were free from 
any monopoly-bounties, they would buy more tea, coffee, 
rubber, hides, tropical fruits, kc, for American con- 
sumers, than the product of the same labor of European 
manufacture from Americar. raw raatorials. Less hours 
3 



34 

of American labor, would produce the American manu- 
factures, that would buj the same amount of tea, coffee, 
&c. 

The dog-in-the-manger holder, of American resources 
of raw materials, can charge, not the foreigner, but his 
fellow citizen's, sweat and blood — his wealth — in boun- 
ties, for the privilege of having his very necessities, that 
could otherwise be imported to give independent em- 
ployment. These bounties must be jDroduced, at the 
sacrifice of the liberties guaranteed by American insti- 
tutions, to support the modern American human op- 
pressor, who but holds the Federal wand of power, and 
says how much American labor shall have for its toil, 
how much wealth this oppressor shall spend in Europe. 

This wand laid on the backs of American labor in the 
form of tariff restrictions on raw materials, causes Amer- 
ican labor to pay custom penalties, only to debar pur- 
chases, except to pay the Federal revenue and let these 
monopolies as mere consumers and non-producers, es- 
cape it, and they spend their income in Europe. After 
securing enough surplus to keep the credit of the gov- 
ernment sound in the minds of government bondholders, 
all further American consumption, comprising the ne- 
cessities of American consumers must pay bounties to 
these naturalized American monopolies. 

All this perversion, of the purpose of American insti- 
tutions, is only intended to deprive American labor of 
its wealth without value received. 

To secure this advantage to the monopolies of Ameri- 
can natural resources, there is involved a very large loss 
of production of American manufactures for export that 
are natural foreign exchanges — that would increase the 



35 

profits or capital of American labor, and have its estate 
one of elevation, peace and plenty — not one of poverty, 
degradation, snifering and vice. 

American labor could then exchange its own manu- 
factures for its necessary tea, coffee, hides, rubber, coal, 
ore, lumber, &c., cheaper than now is done ; causing 
thereby every farm, mine, manufactory, railroad, city, 
harbor, lighthouse and dock to be produced for less 
labor or cost, yet be more profitable co-operative capital 
for American labor to possess, being protected from all 
bondage for charges to support do-nothing ruling classes, 
as American institutions provide. It is not improbable 
that American labor being employed earning profits, in- 
stead of working for bare subsistence, would double the 
national wealth annually with no more labor. 

The present census will only show the wealth Ameri- 
can citizenship holds in trust — bonded for debt. It will 
note its volume, as in Presidential canvasses, but not its 
distribution by being bonded with liens ; on its railroads 
principally. 

Railroads are designed to be used only for the public 
good, not for the perpetual taxation of the wealth of the 
American people, by extra cost of carrying charges, to 
thus support an alien income aristocracy. 

Nothing will be done, in the coming Federal census 
report, to show up for the education of American labor, 
how it has come about, that Central New York laborers 
who made the improvements of canals, railroads, farms, 
manufactories, cities, harbors, (fee, before the late civil 
war, were well-to-do, and even wealthy, owning manu- 
facturing and railroad stocks, getting co-operative in- 
come therefrom. Now they are poor. Monopolies hold 



liens on all the wealth of New York, as on that of other 
States or commonwealths. Such a comprehensive cen- 
sus would destroy the subtle power of monopolies for 
indirect taxation of American labor for private uses. 

It results that only a few dispensibles or luxuries are 
imported to compete with a large production of home 
manufactures, which are forced up to duty line in prices, 
and not produced any more than the necessities of 
American, citizenship will compel it to consume at bounty 
prices. 

The original plan of federation's ideal of protection 
aimed to protect consumers from all unnecessary cost of 
living, to make America a haven of earthly rest. The 
present system is to protect income classes abroad from 
all taxation, and to make labor's taxation absorb all its 
profits. It is essentially British in principle in its old 
form, before the " corn laws " Avere passed, and since 
then also. It only protects landlord monopolies. 

A few imports compared with the volume of home 
manufactures are paraded in Presidential campaigns, as 
showing the great employment and prosperity of Amer- 
ican labor. It is not paraded that American labor gets 
no profit or protection-^only taxation, as the reward for 
its toil. 

The monopolies of natural resources, paying the poor- 
est of contract-labor v/ages required to produce raw 
materials, get profits without equivalent and American 
labor alone pays these profits out of the wealth it pro- 
duces, and would have to preserve the freedom of the 
Christian family relation, but for the policy of making 
raw materials a monopoly. 

Monopoly aristocracy that spends income abroad, 



37 

becomes riclier only, bj the operation, bnt the aggregate 
of American wealth, distributed to American labor, is 
immeasurably less — none at all, only as it is held in 
trust, bonded to pay the profits of its use to support 
income classes. 

The causes of non-production and non- consumption 
are the same in America as in Ireland. Land entail- 
ments with power to exact high rents. As American 
natural resources are becoming more and more absorbed, 
the condition is pinching harder in its infringement on the 
rights of American labor. 

Another inevitable result is, that the higher the pen- 
alties on raw materials, the more rapid is the increase , 
and the greater the volume of debt contracted abroad, 
on which only American labor earns interest. This is 
all secured by liens on American natural monopolies and 
American capital represented by improvements thereon. 
This is the result of an export of raw materials, to pay 
for imports. It makes the cost of foreign exchanges to 
American industry to be greater, the value of its pro- 
ducts wherewith to pay to be less. 

The policy in power is the great supporter of Cobden 
Club principles of free trade. All this could be arrested 
from the accumulations of British Cobden Club free- 
trade monopoly foreign commerce, and become national 
wealth as the capital of American labor. Cobden free 
trade commerce should not get American raw materials 
at below cost. They should be for the use of American 
labor to manufacture with. 

It is the absolute loss of all American free trade for- 
eign commerce, that is the sacrifice required, to secure 
American wealth in monopoly hands, rather than in the 



38 

hands of American labor that makes it. American labor 
must not own any capital, because the use could then 
earn profits for itself, making it independent of monopo- 
lies, and not oblige it to submit to the political restriction 
of two running after one job of producing surplus raw 
materials, because the government deprived labor of the 
other job — that of manufacturing, taking away all the 
national wealth from American labor, and giving it to 
monopolies, so that they can force it to work for bare 
subsistence. 

Uncle Sam rides across his domain surrounded with 
a good deal of toggery — carpets on the floors of his 
workingmen's tenement houses, poor sanitary improve- 
ments, poor roads, cities burdened with debt, &c., and 
no foreign commerce. Of course he has a heavy, care- 
worn face, although to the outside world, which does not 
know how much he owes, judging from the abundance 
of natural resources with which he is possessed, more 
than he can cultivate, all paraded in the census reports, 
not even measured in detail, only by comparison with 
firmament, skinning his lands, mines and forests for 
poor wages, the minions who enslave him splurging in 
Europe, that he ought to be the happiest man on earth. 

His position seems a paradise to poor outcast labor, 
denied the natural means of life, such as he possesses. 
He has, however, lost his pride in his American citizen- 
ship, with all its glorious record of heroic events ; and 
is absorbed in thinking of how to fund his increasing 
foreign debt, by keeping up a brisk sale of railroad se- 
curities, and not commit an act of insolvency, that would 
lower the value of those he has yet for sale, and provide 
for debts crowding on him. He is bonded up to his 



39 

ears, and has a riugiiig sensation therein, as he is taking 
water at the month. He is increasing his liens as fast 
as new territories are opened np of approved value for 
security, so long as his tenantry — xlmerican labor — ch \. 
pay the perpetual debt of penalties or usury for the use 
of the wealth himself has produced, AvrongfuUy taken, 
and shout in Presidential election times the greatness of 
American institutions between breathing spells when he 
is panting from overwork rushing forward his raw ma- 
terials to Eurppe. 

He is right, to praise those prmciples of comity be- 
tween nations, as exemplified in the Federal relation of 
sovereign States or nations, also American land tenure 
without political entailments ; and the sources of power 
being home-rule, or in the States, not emenating from 
Washington. 

As yet only clotting the outlines of his magnificent 
heritage with wealth, has enabled plucky Uncle Sam to 
keep his head above water, weighted down as he is by 
tariff restriction penalties, charged on the production of 
his wealth, also bounty prices for raw materials from his 
own natural resources, to those he has permitted pos- 
session — however, not for the purpose of abridging the 
natural use of them, but to encourage investaient of 
capital in improvements for more economical production 
of raw materials. 

He is therefore too poor in the possession of free 
trade capital to have profits for his labor by its co-op- 
eration, to thereby get out of foreign and domestic debt 
by a free exchange of manufactures for his debt con- 
tracts, rather than balance with the sum of crude exports 
and railroad securities. 



40 

He is lionored witli the guardianship of his great 
possessions, located on boundless natural monopolies, 
all, however, bonded for all they are worth. He is ap- 
parently satisfied with the possession of them as toggery. 
This pastime for the present appears to be enough to 
satisfy his ambition. 

His sons, who should be marketing his products all 
over the world for him, instead of employing a foreign 
commerce to do it, to secure him the profits, instead of 
Cobden club monopolies the party in power are giving 
them to, are growing up on every farm and in every city 
without profitable employment, only suffering drudgery 
or rusting at home, for want of free, instead of servile 
occupation. The only conditions of his sons' employ- 
ment are, that they will produce by their toil, of their 
first fruits, a sacrifice of penalties to support an income 
aristocracy at home, also one in Europe, leaving only 
subsistence, but no wealth for themselves — hence when 
American girls have a jhancf that ffe eligible in Europe, 
they marry there as a better condition. What record 
of gallantry compels American energy to make such an 
exhibition of itself. 

Uncle Sam has got to be a good deal of a blather- 
skite of late. His attempt to produce wheat, cot- 
ton, wool, silver, copper, iron, &c., at present cost 
tariff restrictions impose, is a dismal failure. His debts 
only increase. For his surplus, of crude products, he 
must find a market, to pay debts of foreign exchange, 
where he is not recompensed for the bounties he has 
been obliged to pay to those he permitted to occupy his 
lands, before producing them. He must take his raw 
materials — to pay for his tea, coffee, &c., and submit to 



4i 

unequal-value exchange. He must either go on short 
rations or give a lieu, pajing a perpetual debt of usury, 
and thus balance his account of foreign exchange, that 
perpetually runs against him. He each year keeps in- 
creasing this debt for as large an amount as he can give 
security on new development of his vast domain and im- 
provements. He must sell all his products too low to 
get any profits or capital to apply on debt. He there- 
fore must mortgage his improvement to keep afloat, and 
live a subservient life, or else he must sell his rights of 
possession and lead a purely dependent, tenantry hunlan 
existence. 

Uncle Sam followed the industry of war for seven 
long, discouraging years of the revolution, because his 
wealth was likely to be impaired by British imperial 
taxation as a license on its production. He was not to 
be permitted to exchange his products of any kind, for 
others representing even a pound of tea, without there 
was to be a charge on his wealth. Some class in Europe 
was to live on the fruits of his labor, without work ; in 
imperial magnificence by oppressing him, who had fied 
from Europe and oppression combined. He had expa- 
triated himself, still glowing with love of home and all 
its dear surroundings, for the one principle of the right 
of free trade for the products of his labor, to secure the 
profits he had earned, as his own wealth. 

Uncle Sam, in the days of his youth and enterprise, 
won the victorious acknowledgment of Great Britain, 
that he was honorably entitled to be free from all such 
■claims, by the right of revolution his valor established. 

His inheritor — the present generation — however, does 
not appear to know how to keeip the grandest estate on 



42 

earth free from debt, nor how to make his work profit- 
able. His natural monopolies, of world-wide value and 
his improvements are not free-trade acquisitions, to suit 
his own convenience, but that of his creditor, who by 
the agency of the party in power, is enabled to live abroad. 
All is subject to entailments. If he produces any sur- 
plus raw materials, he must consult his creditor, who 
sells or finds a market for them to suit his own profit. 
His oppressor demands penalties on every exchange, so 
he makes mlj those that poverty can. He possesses the 
use only of taxed or borrowed capital, bonded for per- 
petual debt of usury. He does not have the benefit of 
the political rights his father established. Instead of 
ruling his own destinies, to have them in harmony with 
the law of Creative power, which dispenses only benefi- 
cence, peace and good will to society that observes that 
law, he does not defend, but permits, himself to be ruled 
over by a false god, the golden calf that himself has im- 
ported — monopoly. He is permitting a political policy 
of oppression and repression on his domain, the costs 
charged up against his wealth, that is the cause of his 
debt. It makes him look on with a lean, languid, jaun- 
diced face, and see foreign free trade with great profits 
made on his raw materials, taken out of his sources of 
wealth, by the degraded tenantry he imports, which 
would be worth much more at home to manufacture into 
higher value exports. Uncle Sam does not appear to 
know how to take advantage of his circumstances. He 
lacks energy, and lets himself be ruled over and kicked 
about. A venal vote is employed to knock him doAvn 
and kick him for falling. He has not preserved his lib- 
erties, consequently is in debt, and the profits of all his 



43 

labor are used to support income aristocracies, while lie 
is a poor, poverty-stricken, degraded toiler. 

He has thereby gotten into so much debt at home and 
abroad, that he has no profits or capital to organize his^ 
industry into co-operation for producing ships and man- 
ufactures, to with these buy his necessary foreign ex- 
changes of tea, coffee, hides, rubber, &c., and thereby 
make the profits Providentially designed by the posses- 
sion of his grand heritage, and pay up his foreign debts, 
and secure wealth from trade of neutral nations. This 
would enable him hereafter not only to keep out of debt,^ 
but have wealth to loan, and revive the life of American 
foreign commerce, selling his products, including rail- 
road equipment, in South America, Asia and Africa, in- 
stead of Europe doing it, and get wealth, free from debt, 
and thereby control his commerce with those nations by 
prices of carrying charges. 

With a restoration of the rights of American labor, 
the spirit of American liberty , would revive. Perhaps 
the honest good nature of Uncle Sam has been too much 
imposed upon, and he will realize the fact that monop- 
oly money is buying up too much of the venal vote, of 
his tenantry, to secure electoral majorities at Washing- 
ton, pledged to bond his inheritance to support monop-^ 
olies at home, also an income aristocracy in Europe. 

The law should never make a monopoly of the sources 
of wealth. All men should be free to obtain the means 
of providing for their necessities, and not be compelled 
to be a charge on society for their maintenance, or else 
to work that others may reap the profits. 

This would compel private or corporate tenures of 
land, to sell the raw materials taken therefrom at their 



44 

natural value. It would force them to be co-operative, 
bj helping others to have profits also. They should 
have no other political rights than those of equality. 
They should be so situated politically, that all their in- 
terests are best served by co-operation only. 

Possessors of freeholds from society, to be used for 
investment of capital in improvements that make farms, 
mines, manufactories, docks, railroads, cities, harbors, 
&c., should all stand alike. None should be overcharged 
by the other for use of their improvements. Each 
should be protected in procuring elsewhere in free trade, 
to make it the public or common interest for each to be 
co-operative with his fellow laborer, and so have no 
laborers that are not co-laborers — none to overcharge 
labor. 

The protection of the landlord of the farm, mine, city 
lot, manufactory, quarry, dock, railroad, street railroad, 
telegraph, telephone, &c., &c., should be such, that he 
could buy all the wealth to be merged into his improve- 
ments in a free trade, not a monopoly, market. 

There should be no bounty charges added, involving 
extra expenditure of capital. 

Bounties only result in compelling every one who is 
to have any good wages to himself to be an under-pro- 
ducer, to recoup for these penalties from his fellow, by 
making products scarce. Hence capital combines for 
the protection of the value of capital that the govern- 
ment does not protect, but taxes for private interests. 
Hence labor unions to protect from producing more 
products than the market will absorb. All these are the 
result of a tariff made for revenue only, with its inci- 
dental protection of monopolies only. If there was 



45 

government protection of free trade for all American 
wealth, there would be no need of labor unions to pre- 
vent an overstock of any kind of products ; no need of 
capital combines for the same purpose. 

Bj a free trade in American raw materials, is not in- 
tended their exchange for foreign manufactures of ser- 
vile labor. This is a Cobden Club principle of trade 
that would force American labor to toil only. It pro- 
vides no Christian Sabbath or day of rest for its labor. 
This would not protect but only put down the value of 
the wealth that American labor produces, leaving its 
own best sources of wealth undeveloped. Free trade, 
however, in foreign servile labor raw materials, is neces- 
sary to break down home monopolies, because there 
cannot be an importation of the sources of wealth as- 
there can be of labor. Since labor then has no natural 
protection against its own competition except by making 
all sources of wealth free, by means of unrestricted use 
of all raw materials of the world and thereby giving em- 
ployment without competing, and paying premiums for 
limited supply raw materials and to thereby get employ- 
ment ; free foreign raw materials become a necessity 
under American institutions, to protect American labor 
from paying monopoly prices at home, to get raw ma- 
terials for its employment ; thereby abstracting the 
wealth that rightfully only belongs to it as its own 
capital, to enrich American] landlord monopolies. For- 
eign raw materials would not then be imported in form 
of manufactures, nor for use in place of American raw 
materials, to manufacture in America. American pro- 
ducers of raw materials would then be willing to take 
the same value that other American labor receives for 



46 

its wealtli. American landlords would then be co-oper- 
ative producers of wealth for public uses. 

It is very different in principle, to permit free trade 
in imported servile-labor manufactures. This would 
prevent American freeholds or landlordships, such as 
American institutions provide for, being profitable, so 
much of foreign raw materials would be in their compo- 
sition. There is perfect freedom for that servile labor 
to emigrate, be free and co-operative, using unlimited 
American raw materials, making American freeholds 
more profitable by their free than restricted use. With 
these free trade conditions for American products, free 
labor immigration would only improve the value of all 
the rest of American wealth to American labor, with its 
free trade rights thus protected. Also all American nat- 
ural-monopoly interests, as was intended by American 
institutions. The present condition of taxed American 
productions causes the immigration of only servile labor 
to cut down the wealth of native labor shall receive as 
its reward, by competition, rather than co-operation. 
Monopoly is the only exchanger of labor's products 
under present political policy. 

With the Federal-relation free trade thus protected, 
labor has only to perform its duty of being industrious, 
in order to prosper in all its temporal, social and reli- 
gious development. It is too much to expect the op- 
pressed laborer under his present political bondage to 
be anything but a degraded citizen. He knows partisan 
majorities do, in violation of his political rights, fail to 
protect the value to him of his wealth, but depreciate it, 
by empowering those who- hold a monopoly of natural 
resources, to force him to overwork and toil, to get the 



47 

raw materials therefrom, those necessities his Christian 
estate of existence requires to be fi*ee. Tariff restric- 
tions on raw materials and a corresponding one on 
manufactures give the market for free trade only to 
monopolies, but never to American labor. Monopolies 
thereby get the profit, but labor alone bears all the bur- 
dens and produces all the capital. 

Is it surprising that labor abhors the monopoly sup- 
ported and defended establishment of society styled 
Christian, in the way it sees these same natural resources 
created for its own Christian life, applied by law for 
temporal establishments, so as to effectually shut out 
their use by labor, on account of their cost, without pro- 
test in behalf of down-trodden humanity, yet they rep- 
resenting profits it has earned, and been forced to part 
with without recompense, so that it is poor, and the 
present temporal establishments for religious and other 
purposes are the result. 

These are the outcome of an unnatural distribution 
of property by exercise of official power for oppression, 
causing labor to provide the support of a ruling income 
class that does not protect, but is a dead weight on the 
natural and Christian rights of labor. In America this 
is in violation of the trust embodied in the contract of 
the Federal relation, as well as of natural law as taught 
by Christian ethics. 

If British and American labor were both free to use 
natural resources without bounty charges, a free trade 
would benefit both countries. Each industry would be 
able to co-operate and aid the other in acquiring natural 
provision in sufficiency for human life. As present po- 
litical conditions exist, ruling over the rights of labor 



48 

of both tliegie countries, the labor of Great Britain, being 
servile, is emigrating to America, evening up the distri- 
bution to suit mutual interests of monopoly power of 
both countries. That in Great Britain prefers emigra- 
tion, to have the land for pasturage, game preserves and 
income residence, because the national wealth is made 
principally by foreign commerce, consisting of profits 
from the taxed labor's products of the world. That in 
America, prefers contract or servile labor immigration, 
because of immense opportunities for taxing profits out 
of American labor in the sale of monopopolized raw 
materials, this servile labor produces so cheap. 

An unusual case may happen for special protection.. 
For example, if any foreign government gives a bounty 
of profits to its own products, that enables them to force 
a stoppage of production outside of its own jurisdiction, 
by supplanting it with these bounty-supported pro- 
ducts. This depreciates the value of improvements of 
the landlord of a farm, harbor, city and manufuctory of 
another nation. Such now are the beet sugar bounties 
of Europe, to crush out the production of cane sugar of 
the tropics. Subsidies for support of a French line of 
steamers to enable the Lyons silk manufacturers to sell 
their silks that are thus reduced in cost of production, 
in America and supplant American production of silk, 
forcing American producers of these products to be idle 
or produce raw materials for export only, for a poor 
living. Subsidies to the Pacific Mail Company, to slide 
in servile Chinese labor at cheap passage rates, to com- 
pete with American citizenship in order to carry the 
profits back to China, coal being at the same time a 
tariff protected monopoh\ ^o^'dng even as high as $25.00' 



49 

per ton on the Pacific coast, effectually killing all Pacific 
Ocean steam commerce by American industry, prevent- 
ing ail development of capital on the Pacific coast, as 
the possession of American industry, forbidding labor 
there to possess any wealth, making peons of it, that a 
few may be monopolists. 

There is also no protection against subsidies to Cana- 
dian railroads, that will enable them to supplement 
their products of transcontinental carrying charges, for 
the taxed-for-bounties carrying charges of American 
railroad production. 

These are overt acts of devastation of American 
wealth, aimed at destruction of the free trade liberties, 
which alone are the subjects of Federal protection of 
American labor, to thereby secure the ownership of its 
profits. 

If, however, the possessors of American resources are 
to be the paternal objects of protection, through tariff 
restrictions, in robbery by an anti-co-operative policy, 
and American labor be only the subject of taxation, then 
custom duties against those subsidized foreign produc- 
tions, will raise the prices of American manufactures on 
American consumers, and put down the wages of Amer- 
ican labor making them. It will force manufacturers to 
impoverish their operatives or co-laborers, in order to 
get enough for American landlord bounties. This po- 
litical status will at the same time put down the value 
of these manufactures, because of having only a limited 
home market, supplying only servile labor that receives 
poor wages. Paternally protected American landlord 
monopolies will get all the profits, by means of limited 
production and high prices, while American labor will 
4 



50 

be groiiucl still more bj galling poverty, being only par- 
tially employed. American consumers will pay these 
high prices for the luxiirj^ of sustaining the present pro- 
tection of monopolies' policy, with all its toggery of 
American imperialism. 

The correct principles for protecting American wealth 
in its natural, and political status, are those established 
b}^ laws protecting from charges of penalties for benefit 
of monopolies on its cost, excluding all but free, intelli- 
gent labor alone, in the element of its value ; laws 
made to conform to the condition, that the more free- 
trade there is for raw materials, the better demand for 
wealth will prevail, and labor generally will better 
acquire more property, the reverse being the case where 
servile conditions prevail, and in the ratio of that ser- 
vility. 

Wages become good, that is, wealth has more value, 
when they are free to trade with, from all penalty 
charges. They are lower, as these charges occur. Under 
a government that protects in the Christian obligation, 
that the laborer is worthy to receive in return the full 
value of the wealth he produces, as a co-operator or co- 
laborer ; any one performing the great religious duty of 
industry, can acquire enough to support the Christian 
family relation. He can secure by his labor the founda- 
tion of a Christian human life. 

A tarijff for revenue cannot lawfully exist under Amer- 
ican institutions. It would tax unequally — in an over 
measure on one portion of wealth and let other wealth 
escape. It is impossible to have such a tariff without 
making an American landlord monopoly, which would 
cause this unequal taxation, that would impair the rights 



51 

of States, and prevent lawful labor or free trade to ac- 
quire what it is enjoined by Creative law to obtain onlj 
by labor. It would put a civil law ban on labor, requir- 
ing the payment of penalties to ruling classes for the 
license to labor, the pohtical condition of European labor. 

The duties of the Federal government, in regulation 
of foreign commerce, are only to see that American 
labor's Federal co-operation shall be protected, devel- 
oped and perfected. To raise revenue by putting charges 
on American foreign commerce, levies them only on 
the American labor's wealth. 

American labor would acquire less wealth in compet- 
ing for that foreign trade, because these charges must 
all come out of the profits of American trade. A tariff 
for revenue is therefore an embargo on American foreign 
free trade, depriving one class of citizens of the right to 
labor and produce wealth according to their capabili- 
ties, and therefore puts them to the disadvantage of ac- 
quiring less wealth. 

British monopoly has foreign commerce under a " tariff 
for revenue only " — principally on tea, coffee, sugar and 
tobacco. It is because British landlord charges are less 
than those of all other nations, free raw materials pro- 
ducing this result, and alone save the foreign commerce 
such a tariff would otherwise destroy. 

A tariff, not for revenue, but for protection, is an ab- 
solute necessity under American institutions, to preserve 
the wealth of the nation to its own labor, freed from all 
entangling alliances or contracts of foreign debt. It is 
true that it is impossible to have such a tariff, without 
it embargoes a form of American free trade, but only 
that which is oppressive of American labor, because it 



52 

forces to take less profits. The end justifies the means, 
therefore, where it prevents American landlord monopo- 
lies that would themselves otherwise tax American for- 
eign commerce for their own gain at sacrifice of public 
interests. Then a purely protective — of labor — tariff 
under American institutions, would destroy British for- 
eign commerce under its present conditions, which would 
have to make the British tariff protective of its labor to 
save it from annihilation, against free trade protection 
of American labor of foreign commerce competition. 
Such a consummation would make American institutions 
" A Light of Liberty Enlightening the World," hailed 
by all downtrodden labor. 

Its protective features are to be, then, that it will 
embargo American foreign commerce, when the condi- 
tions are such that American labor can only get poor 
wages or small profits by such foreign free trade, no 
other conditions being offered. Its duty is therefore to 
forbid American labor degrading itself into servility by 
taking poor wages or small wealth for its labor from 
another nation that refuses to offer any better for ex- 
change, as the practice would contaminate all American 
society and make it servile and be against American 
public good. 

Tariffs must then be on dispensables or luxuries — such 
as those that their substitutes are natural productions 
of American labor — only because these luxuries are ex- 
changed by monopolies, who have made their labor 
servile in producing them, and want only American raw 
materials for them. The whole protective object should 
be to secure the wealth of the federation in the hands 
of its industries, by protecting against monopolies get- 



53 

ting it, for the purposes of co-operation in production, 
and thereby be the guardian of labor. 

The foreign industry, skilled in producing dispensables 
or luxuries, that can be made from American raw ma- 
terials, is invited to come to America and make those 
things that Cobden free trade monopolies offer for 
American raw materials, and use the wealth they thus 
produce in giving plenty of employment to American 
landlords of farms, mines, railroads, cities, &c., for their 
produce, in getting out all the raw materials they can 
produce for this natural demand, have a home market, 
save foreign freight, insurance and exchange and all 
American labor save this profit as its capital, be co-op- 
erative thereby, and all get equally good wages, by get- 
ting the greatest possible amount of wealth for the least 
labor. 

This is the reverse of the policy in power, which is 
that the people's money of greenbacks shall be taken 
away from them, and contracts denied currency, draw- 
ing interest in form of government bonds shall be ex- 
changed for them and be a lien on all the wealth of 
American labor, with no value received, for this obliga- 
tion of restriction in their use. Then a tariff be put on 
American labor's own necessities, refusing it any, unless 
it will submit to pay penalties enough out of its profits 
to pay the interest on these government bonds, and for 
the balance of its means of living, pay landlord bounties. 

This is making it a tariff for revenue only, in order to 
tax the profits out of American labor's hands, so that it 
shall be in a condition of poverty, getting only poor 
wages, rather than a tariff for protection only, of these 
profits in its hands from suffering any such charges, that 



54 

would impair the capital it produces and has free right 
to possess as its own. 

There is no way to protect American labor in acquir- 
ing wealth but to tax for revenue internally, in connec- 
tion with a tariff for its protection only — that is, for 
protection of American labor in its foreign commerce, 
applying the penalties collected for revenue for the great 
purpose of avoiding any charge on the profits of labor 
for revenue, and take all revenue thereby from the in- 
come or profits of capital, not from profits of labor. 

Taxation for revenue must necessarily be by assess- 
ment that would cause no check on the production of 
wealth, hence must be internal only, by a percentage of 
profits from the income of capital. This is no check on 
production, because capital will not be held back from 
use to facilitate production on account of charges fo^ 
public uses coming out of its income, as it is of no good 
without use. Capital will then remain at home, because 
of cheap cost of living. In the case of labor, if at best 
it can have only a bare subsistence, there is no incite- 
ment to produce wealth, and monopolies will use that 
which they thus acquire to restrict production of any 
wealth they cannot control for their own profits. 

If some industries are to be controlled as a public 
policy, the way is made perfectly free to have just as 
much for the same labor in producing any other wealth 
by protecting American labor. This must be by the full 
protection of free American trade, but not of free for- 
eign trade, by impoverishing American labor. 

It is inevitable but that such tariff restrictions as re- 
strict American production and free trade, at home and 
abroad, although certain branches of foreign products 



55 

may be restricted from free trade in American markets 
to get revenue, not for protection, incidentally causes all 
tlie profits arising from production to go to monopoly 
interests, to be free to loan, or spend abroad. This is 
what escapes such taxation, while labor alone pays it, 
out of its profits. 

A tariff is impossible under American institutions, if 
they are to remain republican, that taxes the means of 
producing wealth, that is, requires a license fee for using 
land for making wealth. 

There is no reason of justice, except the protection of 
the equality of right of all American wealth to be free 
from penalty charges abroad, or else to be indemnified 
for loss of foreign free trade by increased home devel- 
opment, that warrants such high-handed, quasi- war 
measures of trade embargoes, as the sovereign, imperial 
power of tariff restrictions. 

The pretext of shutting out all foreign commerce by 
American industry in its own products by overtaxing 
their production, in order to give it more employment, 
and at better wages at home, is a lying ruse of monopo- 
lists. Lower wages is the only result and less work. A 
tariff of this kind involves necessarily a taxation on raw 
materials, and thereby the establishment of an American 
landlord monopoly, which only employs labor at the 
lowest possible servile wages. American labor is there- 
by debarred the rights to buy its raw material so it can 
have free trade for its products. 

Tariff restrictions of really protective principles, of all 
American labor alike, favoring none, would cause such 
an immigration of only educated skilled labor to Amer- 
ica, and there would be such a rapid production of 



5Q 

Avealtli, and American labor would itself be so wealthy, 
and the facilities of accumulating wealth by monopolies 
throiio;h servile labor would be so restricted in those 
countries from which this immigration came, that their 
governments would be obliged to remove the political 
condition of servility, so their remaining labor would be 
emancipated, to save from being depopulated, or their 
monopoly oppressors from being driven out by force. 

The correct principle in American tariff restrictions, 
is to force foreign industries to assert their natural 
rights to the profits of their production, as the only con- 
dition which will admit of free trade in American mar- 
kets for the products of their labor ; because it is impos- 
sible for these foreign industries to so trade as to preserve 
the value of American w^ealth to its own labor, without 
they are free to own the wealth they produce. Even 
this is not the salvation of American labor, unless all its 
internal political conditions are protected in the wealth 
it acquires, by having no political protection of monop- 
olies. 

Therefore Cobden Club principles of free trade can- 
not be tolerated, under American institutions as con- 
structed by our forefathers, although they are in harmony 
with the principles of the party in power. They are in 
fact tolerated by its policy in this way, in- violation of 
American institutions. That is, it permits foreign man- 
ufactures to come in just enough to get revenue out of 
American labor's profits and thereby forces to less pro- 
duct of home manufactures and more export raw mate- 
rials too cheap. It therefore gives Cobden Club free 
trade to the world by furnishing it enough American 
cheap raw materials, as compensation for excluding it 



57 

from free trade in American markets. It is a great 
friend of the European mouopolv. The penalties are 
nominally high, but this is because American landlord 
monopolies are getting very high penalties from the 
protection of their resources, by a high duty on raw 
materials, so that American consumers do not have to 
suffer more loss of wealth by paying revenue to the gov- 
ernment, than to American landlord monopolies. The 
policy of the party in power is to preserve these bal- 
ances, but not to have any tariff reform that would lighten 
the toil of American labor, and protect it in securing 
more wealth, by refusing its aid to monopolies in their 
occupation of the public lands and robbery, degrading 
American labor. 

The foreign conditions of depreciation of the value of 
American products, demanding protective-tariff restric- 
tions on foreign dispensable s or luxuries, are caused by 
their establishment of landlord entailments and other 
monopolies, like the Bank of England. In either case 
the result is the same. Those producing the American 
products of foreign commerce, do not get their value out 
of them abroad. Producers of foreign lands are profit- 
able for American labor, only Avhen they retain their 
profits or capital as the basis of exchange. 

If monopoly only has profits for sale, and sells them 
for more, but first buys them of their servile labor for 
less than they are worth, then the condition is one of 
forced under-production and under- consum^otion, not 
for benefit of producer, but of the income class that 
rules over it. He gets poorer wages for them, because 
of a restricted, rather than free, trade. The consumer 
pays more than they are worth because they become 



58 

monopolies. International free trade witli sucli condi- 
tions causes both industries to receive only servile 
wages. 

Absolute free trade with China would only cause 
American labor to receive Chinese Avages. It would 
make no difference how many or valuable products were 
produced by labor-saving devices of American labor. All 
they would bring would be what was in the market ta 
exchange for them. American labor would have to take 
Chinese products for its own, those left for subsistence 
after Chinese monopolies had absorbed the profits. 
That is, if American labor were free, Chinese labor be- 
ing -like present American and European labor — servile 

The term "tariff for revenue only," is very misleading. 
It should not be construed to mean, that there should 
be a tariff for revenue. Buch a tariff is anti-co-opera- 
tive in its nature and therefore anti- American. The 
only logical meaning of the term under American insti- 
tutions can be, that penalties, arising from tariff restric- 
tions made for protection of American labor to preserve 
the natural distribution of wealth — be applied for reve- 
nue only, not as bounties to sectional interests. Other- 
wise the States would lose their sovereign rights of pro- 
tection within their bounds from over and unequal taxa- 
tion without civil-law relief. They would by this process, 
be only removing the claws of the lion of their protection 
to hang them up in the archives, at Washington, as the 
diplomatic trophies of treaties of subjugation of the lib- 
erties of States or Nations, to an alien, imperial power, 
ruling from Washington. 

Custom duties to be lawful, however, must not neces- 
sarily be prohibitive — only protective by being compen- 



59 

siitive. If the penalties are sufficient to recoup the 
damage suffered by American foreign commerce, and 
taken from American consumers of what would not injure 
them, if deprived of their use, and applied for revenue 
only, home substitutes being cheap because free from, 
all bounty charges, then the tariff is thoroughly and only 
protective — not in the least taxative of any interest — of 
American labor. Such a tariff does not destroy the 
State's sovereign rights as nations independent of each 
other, if applied for revenue only, since* there must be a 
Federal revenue, that States must otherwise contribute. 

Under American institutions, without need for a Fed- 
eral revenue, there could be no such thing as a protec- 
tive tariff made. Protection then would have to be 
secured by an absolute embargo of those foreign monop- 
oly manufactures made by servile labor, that are now 
entered subject to custom penalties. 

Our forefathers, including Jefferson, claimed that al- 
though tariff was to be applied for revenue only, because 
revenue was a necessity, yet its protective policy or 
power was to be paramount, while revenue should be 
collected internally, rather than not have the tariff pro- 
tective only. If it was found that duties were too heavy, 
and that therefore American foreign trade languished 
because unprofitable, then they were to be lightened, and 
all the balance of the revenue was to come from internal 
taxation. When the tariff is made for revenue, it only 
taxes American labor, ceases to be protective of it. It. 
becomes protective only of American landlord monop- 
olies. If the tariff' were protective of American labor 
no complaint would be made, when Germany excluded 
American meat and France restricted free trade in 



60 

American grain, for tlie home market would be better 
than any those countries could possibly afford. Our 
forefathers would have abandoned tariff restrictions, if 
they believed that this would best protect American for- 
eign free trade, except as possibly a temporary resort, 
until the government became well cemented, frankly tax- 
ing labor as a necessity for organization only. Principle 
was temporarily supplanted for policy only, but not for 
precedent. 

The precedents under the x4.merican government for 
taxing necessities of American labor by tariff penalties, 
for revenue only, to preserve the public credit and pay 
the public debt, were a part of American slavery and 
other landlord political traditions imported from Eu- 
rope. They are bad in principle. They are not Ee- 
publican, because monopoly-wealth and privilege, rather 
than labor, is represented and its power preserved, while 
labor is deprived of the political povrer to preserve itself. 
They are wholly inexcusable practices. They never can 
be so adjusted as not to protect monopolies in taxing 
bounties out of American labor, making it poorer and 
less able to pay its debts, thereby restricting its free 
trade, and compelling it to be so degraded as to employ 
monopoly capital to make its exchanges, because too 
poor to have any capital or credit of its own to do this 
itself ; this monopoly capital simply using its credit for 
currency, of as little value as iDOSsible to be current at 
all, because the lower the value the greater the oppres- 
sion and profit. 

That is, the more the tariff is for revenue and the less 
for protection, the more it will protect monopolies, the 
more it will tax labor, the poorer American industry 



61 

will be,. and the poorer in value the credit it uses for its 
currency, and the greater will be its foreign indebted- 
ness on which it must pay perpetual debt of interest. 

Any Federal revenue to keep up the credit of the gov- 
ernment, should be by an equal internal taxation, as a 
Federal principle, and only just enough for this purj)ose ; 
always using greenbacks for currency and legal tender, 
while public debt exists the government never buying 
any bullion, only coining on demand for American labor. 

To have internal taxation an equal assessment on the 
income of the national wealth, it should be indirect. 
Wealth cannot be reached and fairly valued for the pur- 
poses of direct taxation. The Federal government in 
its control of railroads, as the licensed or privileged 
common carriers for the great public, could take a per- 
centage of the receipts for fiscal revenue. This would 
have the advantage of being a great check on public 
waste, because the people would be very sensitive to 
every overcharge for freight, the results of which no one 
could escape, and everybody would thereb}/ contribute 
his share. Internal taxation on spirits, beer and tobacco 
are unequal taxations, although perhaps they might be 
equalized if the same amount was placed on imported 
goods of same kind. The only justification for taxing 
them is not for revenue but to control their use for so- 
cialistic purposes. The present tax on them comes all 
on American labor, whether it consumes or not and only 
protects monopolies. Social rights require that the gov- 
ernment should manufacture those they control, if abuse 
in their use is to be corrected as the object of penalties. 
There is no right in taxing an individual as a penalty 
for consumption for revenue. That citizen does not 



62 

stand in equal right before the law. He is over and 
•unequally taxed. The use of any thing by the citizen 
that is lawful to make, is his social right under the law. 
The fundamental remedy from any wrong resulting from 
use of any thing, is the elevation of labor, by removing 
unlawful oppressions. 

Admitting these principles of protection to be correct, 
and to have been in force in the previous administration 
of the Federal government, the deduction may be logic- 
ally made, that there would have been no civil war on 
account of slavery. Simply to have protected all pro- 
duction of wealth in freedom from penalties that only 
absorb profits of labor without equivalent, would have 
made the production of wealth by free labor so much 
more profitable that slave labor would have been aban- 
doned. It would have paid better to hire labor to co- 
operate with Southern natural monopolies and improve- 
ments thereon. 

It is a historical fact that the products of Southern 
monopolists by slave labor were sold at bounty prices to 
American politically free labor of the North. This Fed- 
eral policy, perpetuated by the party in power, absorbed 
the profits of its free labor to Southern monopoly of 
slave power, for which these monopolists rendered no 
equivalent. Southern landlord monopolies thereby got 
wealth appropriated as bounties by the Federal govern- 
*ment, without regard to the rights of States, out of the 
profits of Northern labor, which received only the wages 
of servile labor, that of subsistence. Northern labor's 
liberties of free trade were sold out by its own State 
representatives, who voted this way to secure an el-ec- 
toral majority and the spoils of office, and thereby made 



63 

mndsills of American free labor to tlie Soiitli. The Sontli- 
eru monopolists had good ground to taunt Northern 
labor with the name mudsills — a labor politically free, 
that was so servile as to sell its political liberties so 
cheap, with all its degrading oppression to be visited 
on future generations, so that its representatives might 
have Federal political honors. Demagogues of the North 
told this Northern labor that such a tariff would give it 
diversified employment, by developing American manu- 
factures. It did not diversify that employment as much 
as a really protective tariff w^ould. It put down the 
value of the national wealth. It was called protective. 
It was in fact of monopolies, but not of American labor. 

The late civil war was caused really by oppression of 
American labor. It made monopoly-wealth South al- 
most strong enough to overturn the government. The 
policy of the party in power is to establish the same 
conditions for another civil war, to result, however, in 
absolute political dissolution of the Federal union, if 
American industry should be so servile as to permit it 
to rule long enough. 

Labor having its profits as capital to co-operate in 
cheapening the cost of the progluction of wealth, would 
have produced * more of it than slave labor, and have 
therefore been more profitable. Slave power could not 
have carried on the late civil war, and would therefore 
have to be abandoned, because so poor and profitless. 

This politically free labor of the North only received 
less wealth for its labor by Federal interference with its 
rights, by which it bonded its profits to landlord monop- 
olies, including those of the South. Free American 
labor could have secured itself full employment by di- 



(54 

versity, including a retention of its foreign commerce^ 
that would have made its profits better than they were, 
that is, its wealth greater, if it had not voted to pay out 
its profits as bounties to those whom it permitted to hold 
natural resources — only, however, for the public good — 
not as a means of taxing bounties out of American labor. 

The late civil war was really caused through oppres- 
sion by Southern monopolies of politically free labor. 
As slave monopoly held the balance of Federal party 
power, free labor permitted its own taxation, which so 
built up slave power that it was able to punish this free 
labor and force it to spill its blood on Southern soil to 
preserve its freedom and the Union. 

The educative position of American citizenship, en- 
trusted with the duty of voting on public policy, demands 
that it shall expose to American toilers, who should be 
free for only animating industry, all the conditions that 
militate against the Federal equality of right, they are 
entitled to, by virtue of their American citizenship ; and 
that far from abundance of American labor, putting down 
the value of its wealth, freed from bounties, this abun- 
dance will improve its value, never depreciate it. 

With constitutional right of protection enforced, all 
the Federal industry becomes co-operative, and there 
will be no such thing as two employers running after 
one employee and thereby put up the price of wages, 
nor of two employees after one employer, putting down 
their price thereby. This only occurs under the rule of 
monopoly powers, over the Federal relation, creating 
arbitrary laws of supply and demand. 

It might be as logically maintained that supply and 
demand of labor regulate themselves independentlv of 



(55 

any other form of taxation or restriction on the produc- 
tion of wealth, as well as that of the tariff. No one be- 
lieves, however, but that Ireland could hold several times 
her present population, and still there be a better de- 
mand with this increased supply of labor for the pro- 
duction of wealth, which is now controlled and withheld 
from production by the government establishment of 
restrictions entailed on natural resources or land, for the 
purpose of appropriating the wealth this labor must 
produce or perish, for imperial, foreign -to-the-realm 
purposes — landlords being empowered to do this. Kents 
are marked up to bounty prices, limiting from enhanced 
cost the use of improvements on natural resources, low- 
ering the value of wealth to Irish labor, by entailing- 
bounty taxation or charges for the privilege of produc- 
ing them; and Irish emigration to secure homes and 
wealth by free industry from such charges on production. 

It is landlord, or natural-resource-monopoly taxation 
of high rents or royalties, by means of this government- 
protected arbitrary value set on the price of improve- 
ments and natural monopolies, to use for procuring raw 
materials, that puts down the value of the wealth Irish 
industry would otherwise produce and hold for itself. 
This taxation by rent charges forces labor to work, only 
to support income aristocracies, by which the producers 
get only a poor living. Monopoly appropriates, by im- 
perial power, all the balance, it being alien and irre- 
sponsible to society for the amount acquired, absorbing 
all there is that is not consumed in cost of production. 

No one believes but that Irish industry in far greater 
supply would receive better profits to each laborer for 
his production of wealth, if landlord monc". :>!" lid not 
5 



66 

absorb them, returning scarcely more than a subsistence 
in form of potatoes, peat and use of hovels to Irish labor. 

All the profits of American labor become monopolized 
capital, used to employ this labor to co-operate Tvith it 
for monopoly profit only. Of this stock, the American 
monopolists wishes to use some to exchange for im- 
ported dispensables or luxuries, such as these anti-Fed- 
eral tariff restrictions have prevented American labor 
from producing at much less cost. 

Some of these, in form of railroad securities, are sold 
in Europe, which even Irish landlords buy. Then how 
can Irish labor compensate for granting it American 
free trade ? It would only thereby absorb American 
wealth, with no equivalent return, because it has none 
to give. Thereby political party power controls labor 
and is the agency to force the profits it produces, to 
support an income aristocracy in Europe, of the most 
imperial, offensive and degrading kind. 

The capital of Irish landlords is produced by Irish 
labor. It is loaned on American securities, forcing rail- 
road carrying charges to be enough higher on every sack 
of flour, every pound of tea, car load of lumber, ton of 
coal, pound of paint, &c., American labor consumes, to 
pay interest on their railroad bonds, that thereby com- 
pels American labor to support Irish income aristocracy 
by its degrading toil. 

American railroad bonds are the income of European 
aristocracy, after American labor has been impoverished 
by imperial-law restrictions into selling them. 

"We are told that this shows the wages of American 
industry to be better than any other. It shows that 
American industry does not get the good wages it pro- 



67 

duces in exchange for them, but that they are absorbed 
bj monopolies at home and European income aristocra- 
cies, and then loaned back with the penalty of usury for 
their use, which American industry must toil to produce 
to support aristocracies, combined to rob both European 
and American industries and keep them poor. 

If American industry retained its profits from the 
clutches of monopoHes, as capital, these would be in- 
vested, among other things, in its own co-operative 
capital, made into railroads. If, then, the prices of 
carrying charges were the same as required to pay divi- 
dends for support of domestic and foreign income aris- 
tocracies, American labor producing these railroads? 
would receive those dividends itself , compensating there- 
by for possible overcharges, and spending that income 
at home, thereby naturally adjusting distribution of 
wealth. These free conditions would make it more 
profitable than to spend it in buying those semi-pagan, 
servile-labor products of Europe and Asia. 

There might be fewer very rich people under such a 
dispensation of the power of the protecting arm of the 
Federal government, but infinitely more independent, 
self-reliant American families, obeying the law of Cre- 
ative power. The aggregate American wealth owned 
by American labor free from debt would be infinitely 
more than the census report of 1890 will show it to be. 

The real cause oi profits or capital pertaining in the 
past to American labor, have alone been the too great 
abundance of natural monopolies, or land, to make pa- 
ternal monopolies — the friends of American labor, secur- 
ing too many free homesteads for labor. These are now 
paying tribute to monopolies, that prevent their having 
the value they otherwise would have. 



68 

The time has passed of as good profits as have pre- 
vailed for American labor, because its railroads are 
drawing revenue abroad from the toil of this labor to 
support foreign income classes, using American natural 
monopolies as their easements under Federal control ; 
and by means of tarijffs for revenue forcing this labor to 
build these railroads for monopolies at less than the 
value of free wages — the price of servile wages. 

The present policy of tariff restrictions on raw ma- 
terials is the cause. Nothing short of extinction of this 
policy will restore the national wealth — its control now 
non-resident — to American labor free from all charges 
on it for debt, with perpetual debt of interest to be en- 
tailed on labor's children as a political condition en- 
tailed on coming generations of servile, un-Christian 
toilers — instead of humanity being endowed by law with 
a Christian estate of freedom. 

There was a great wrong done American labor follow- 
ing the late civil war, that greenbacks were suppressed, 
and contracts funded with penalties, bonding the profits 
of American labor, and national banks of issue estab- 
lished freed from performing lawful contracts. The 
wrong was sustained to enable monopolists to get rich 
at expense of American labor, overburdened by its 
Federal tariff for revenue. Protection only of monopoly 
was thereby established to hold the national wealth and 
rule over American labor bonded to be in a servile con- 
dition. 

The rapid extinguishment of the public — Federal, 
State and county — debt was made wholly by use of 
greenbacks, without oppression of American labor. 

A high tariff for revenue, all out of American labor, 



69 

plausibly to sustain the credit of the goyernment, really 
to enhance the yalue of goyernment bonds, bought be- 
low par, was part of the program. 

All this was done under the campaign cry-of facilitat- 
ing the people's production of wealth, by giving them 
employment. It only made the lien on that production, 
good for many times the yalue American industry re- 
ceiyed for its labor, the tariff being for revenue to pay 
these bonds — not for labor's protection. 

It is so to-day, and designed by a subtlety quite beyond 
average American comprehension. Political policies so 
effectually establish a monied aristocracy that the army, 
navy and all the powers of the government will be under 
its management as retainers. It will control all repre- 
sentation, if its rule continues, and sovereignties of the 
States, because American labor is made servile. 

The first effectual " header " to its imperial extension 
of power was the resignation of Senators Conkling and 
Piatt from the United States Senate, in order to prevent 
irresponsible powers at Washington controlling the po- 
litical rights of the State of New York, and rob her pro- 
ducers of wealth of their Federal co-operative value, by 
robbing them of free representation that would protect 
their rights. 

Imperial governments depend on taxing the profits 
growing out of the productions of servile labor — instead 
of those growing out of the use of capital — for revenue, 
so long as labor is vicious and ignorant enough to be 
incompetent to perform the duties of self-government 
for the public good. 

There is no benefit to American labor in making it 
feel a sense of its wrongs, without a corresponding sense 



70 

of its duties. Such is the work of demagogues. It must 
not violently lay hold of existing civil law institutions> 
until it can organize and unite to protect co-operation 
only, doing justice to all, putting down the claims of all 
private interests, and be able thus to establish and pro- 
tect the free institutions to which it is heir, by supple- 
menting those existing. 

It must do far different from what labor is now doing, 
with all the governments of all the Americas, including 
Canada. It must not transfer its duties of government 
to the power of private interests or monopolies, by giv- 
ing them the money power. It must retain this to itself . 

To-day the governments of all the Americas are more 
imperial than republican. The imperialism governing 
them — a non-resident power — perpetual debt — control- 
ling labor and making it only servile — is the ruling power, 
the tribute being to European monopolies. 

President Jackson's first message of second term in 
1832, says : 

" Those who take an enlarged vip-w of the condition 
of our country, must be satisfied that the policy of pro- 
tection must be ultimately limited to th®se articles of 
domestic manufacture which are indispensable to our 
safety in time of war. Within this scope, on a reasona- 
ble scale it is recommended by every consideration of 
patriotism and duty, which will doubtless always secure 
to it a liberal and efficient support. But beyond this 
object, we have already seen the operation of the system 
productive of discontent. In some sections of the re- 
public, its influence is deprecated as tending to concen- 
trate wealth in a few hands, and as creating those germs 
of dependence and vice which in other countries, have 



71 

characterized the existence of monopolies, and proved 
so detrimental of liberty and the general good. A large 
portion of the people, in one section of the republic, 
declares it not only inexpedient on these grounds, but 
as disturbing the equal relations of property by legisla- 
tion, and therefore unconstitutional and unjust." 

Jefferson, also, before Jackson, was opposed to the 
practice and principle of not taking the public revenue 
from the income of capital, instead of from the profits of 
labor. It was, however, found necessary to submit to 
it, because monopoly — including law-protected slavery 
— had the great voting power, which it appears to have 
to-day. This is a bad precedent, not to be defended. 
It is not subject to the contract of the Federal relation 
and the spirit of Americar: institutions. 

It remains to be seen whether or not, this power can 
continue to exist, with the extinction of the paternal 
monopoly of slavery, that had previously held the bal- 
ance of power ; whether monopoly rule shall, or not, de- 
stroy American institutions. Jefferson and Jackson were 
essentially friends of industry and haters of monopolies, 
hence advocated the elimination of all monopoly protec- 
tive features from the tariff, making those imported pro- 
ducts free, the use of which would enable American 
labor to hold its profits as its own capital or wealth, 
against the assaults of monopoly. They would rely on 
internal taxation for revenue, rather than make any 
tariff restrictions than those for protection of American 
labor in securing wealth. They would make the hum- 
blest classes self-supporting, and well provided in natu- 
ral comforts, that they be not a charge on the public 
funds and be forced to degraded dependence. 



72 

Protection of profits in the hands of those who make 
them, is the only possible means of applying them to 
preserve the autonomy, sovereignty and equality of the 
States or nationalities in their Federal relation. Our 
forefathers were opposed to collecting a revenue to give to 
States, although Jackson advocated a distribution of an 
already existing Federal surplus, for the sole reason, 
that it would prevent jobbery at Washington. Public 
improvements were justified, only as military necessities, 
like the Pacific railroad ; having in view incidentally 
their commercial advantages, but not as a means of 
spending money for the sake of getting rid of a surj)lus 
arising from a tariff for revenue. 

The present tariff restrictions are made to get fiscal 
revenue out of the profits of labor only, and free all the 
profits of capital that is made thereby non-resident from 
taxation ; hence there are better profits of income to- 
day from the use of capital than from the wages of labor, 
after profits are taken out for revenue, and bounties to 
private interests. 

There is absolutely no protection of the production 
of manufactures at all, any more than there is of the pro- 
duction of any other American wages. The tariff shuts 
out free trade of foreign products, only of the kind, and 
for the sole purpose of taxing the profits of American 
labor for the gain of private interest. 

The result of the false position that American laborers 
— classed as manufacturers — are put in,"against the pub- 
lic interest, and for permanent injury to themselves is, 
that they must have periodically higher duties to exist 
as a temporary relief, but necessarily be always infant 
industries, because monopolies gauge their necssities. 



73 

and get forever after all the profits, once supply over- 
takes demand. 

So the wages of American labor, including those of the 
manufacturer are not free, but taxed, because monopo- 
lies absorb their profits. Exclusion of foreign manu- 
factures is no protection of the wealth of home manufac- 
tures. Theirs are, therefore, poor wages — wages of sub- 
sistence only — without profits — hence they must borrow 
capital of monopolies with which to do business, paying 
interest therefor, because they are not protected by 
Federal laws in retaining the profits they have earned 
as their OAvn capital. To protect their wealth, they 
must be also protected from landlord charges at home. 

The policy of the present tariff is to exclude the use 
of foreign raw materials, by excluding manufactures 
from them except enough to make labor pay the tariff' 
for revenue only. This tariff for revenue is so made as 
to secure a market for American monopoly of raw mate- 
rials in a larger amount, and only on condition that 
American labor shall be heavily taxed for use of them. 
There is, therefore, no Federal protection whatever of 
American labor by the present tariff, for revenue, but 
only of landlord monopoly — pure taxation. , The balance 
account of American wages is therefore in debt to pen- 
alties in cost of production ; so it has nothing after pay- 
ing the political debts, it votes to subsidise all its prof- 
its to honor, with the co-operation of the venal vote — 
the only power of co-operation protected. 

Silver, like shoes, is a product of American labor, 
which should not be charged bounties in cost of pro- 
duction, since the surplus competes with Mexico and 
other parts of America in supplying it as a crude pro- 
duct for India and China. 



74 

The political regime under present tariff restrictions 
forces American industry to deliver silver, because of a 
tariff for revenue only, among other unmanufactured 
products, like copper, lead, wheat, cotton, hops, butter, 
cheese, &c., for mere barter to a foreign commerce, at 
any convenient harbor, costing enhanced freight charges, 
made by foreigners on the American shore. 

It is forced to hustle them out of the country, before 
there are more bounty charges on them when manufac- 
tured, inflicted by the inquisition of Federal power- 
It compels them to get beyond the reach of American 
taxation for private interests, to have them manufactured 
cheap enough to buy foreign necessaries with, although 
this same Federal inquisition compels American labor 
to be idle. The present Federal tariff restrictions, en- 
hancing the cost of silver arbitrarily, for example, pre- 
venting its home use for manufacture, are paving the 
way for rule over American labor by the foreign power 
of debt. It controls through lien contracts, drawing its 
revenues by absorbing the profits of American labor^ 
forcins^ it to take from foreign commerce such imports as 
exported raw materials will buy so sparingly, after de- 
ducting from their value foreign fi-eight, insurance and 
exchange. 

American labor must get into debt for the balance of 
imports, on account of actually having only low-valua- 
tion products to pay with. These are the poor rewards 
of owning an abundance of natural resources, handing 
them over to monopolies, and working hard without free 
trade to prevent a loss of profits. 

American industry has no market of its own, because 



I 



75 

of the tariff-for-revenue restriction bond it wears, which 
enjoins it from any free trade whatever — with all the^ 
best markets of the world — those of natural mutual ex- 
change. Landlord monopolies insist on haying all the 
|)rofits of the labor of the manufacturer, if he wishes to 
do the service of paying for all foreign exchanges, and 
keeping American labor of all kinds free from the bond- 
age of perpetual foreign debt of interest. The present 
tariff for revenue incidentally protects the American 
landlord in enforcing these demands, but provides no 
refuge of American labor for resisting them. 

It humbly pleads with monopolies, and buys credit 
enough from them in exchange for its own valuable 
wealth — frozen out of the free trade use that would dis- 
pense with need of credit. 

This credit produces public and private improve- 
ments, consisting of railroads, telegraphs, telephones, 
cities, harbors, &c., instead of their being produced by 
a mutual exchange of solid wealth. These are foreclosed 
and absorbed by monopolies, to redeem contracts made 
to obtain this credit, and by them sold in part to Europe, 
pay being taken also in luxuries or dispensables — for 
traveling expenses — living in Europe, and for the dozens 
of trunks, belonging to every wealthy family returned 
home to visit, filled with valuables, not paying custom 
dues. 

There is also a brisk business of placing large amounts 
of this xlmerican wealth in Europe — under the name of 
marriage contracts. American girls are sometimes the 
auxiliary, rather than the principal consideration en- 
tering into these contracts. 



76 

The girls are not to blame, since American industry 
lias been long-eared enough to lose the most precious 
liberties of American citizenship, its manliness and in- 
dependence. It is not worthy of their notice, having 
neglected proper provision for family support, and un- 
dertaken the contract of supporting, by its own toil, an 
income aristocracy in Europe, in addition to one at 
liome, and the extravagance of a spoils-of-office party in 
power. 

It has become so impoverished with a generation of 
poor wages that it is incompetent to maintain good so- 
ciety relations. It must borrow the use of capital from 
Europe to live on, paying interest for its use, bonding 
its heritage the fathers of the revolution made free. 
The children of some of those American girls, now set- 
tled in Europe, if they had suffered themselves to be 
wedded to servile American husbands, would be drudg- 
ing to earn the income of European aristocracy. 

A monopoly of American landscapes, consequently of 
raw materials provided by our forefathers for free use of 
American labor, enhances the price or cost of all Amer- 
ican wealth, including improvements upon natural re- 
;sources themselves. This status makes it cost more 
labor to produce American cities, harbors, manufacto- 
ries and railroads. At the same time, it puts down their 
net value after they are produced to American labor, 
but not to income classes abroad, because it deprives of 
a free trade use to secure value. 

This is the quality of wages monopolies furnish Amer- 
ican producers. They are only contract, servile-labor 
wages, like the wages of slaves — without profits. It is 



77 

intended they shall be so poor that labor must get into- 
debt for its living expenses, and then borrow enough, on 
the credit ot its homes and sources of wealth, bonding 
all to pay usury or penalties, amounting to enough to 
support an American and European aristocracy. It is 
therefore very apparent that American labor has too big 
a contract on its hands to be idle, travel and have many 
holidays. 

After the American revolutionary war the cost of lum- 
ber to build a road, canal, city, manufactory, mine or 
ship, was the charge for the labor to cut down the trees 
and make them into lumber. There was no cost for 
stumpage, royalties, bounties or penalties, charged by 
some who got them for nothing — as it is to-day. There 
was then too much unoccupied, unimproved land to 
make a monopoly of natural wealth of location. 

The American revolutionary tax was to save British 
monopoly power, and its foreign commerce at the same 
time, against such free trade American competition. 

What our forefathers of the revolution accomplished, 
the present political policy has given up, and is defiantly 
contributing the profits of American labor to British 
monopoly Cobden Club free trade, by estabhshing an 
American monopoly aristocracy, to clog American pro- 
gress and stifle American liberty and her spirit of free 
trade abroad. 

Under the present servility of all the labor of all the 
Americas to monopolies, it will be compelled to pay 
enough more for carrying charges than they cost to pro- 
duce, in making its own internal exchanges, to support 
an income aristocracy, whose income is s^pent in Europe, 



78 

>and at the same time be deprived of any foreign com- 
merce of its own. 

This settles the whole question of European control of 
American home commerce. What does Europe care for 
the Monroe doctrine ? She has only to remain passive, 
so long as American labor pays this perpetual debt of 
penalties or usury. The exchanges of American labor 
among their own States do not even therefore have po- 
litical protection of free trade, but are subject to these 
charges out of their value, for no value returned. 

Any poHtical revolt against paying these penalties 
may be visited by a naval infliction in detail on Ameri- 
can States — the smaller first — of European powers, 
which are all getting interested in this matter. Already 
these foreign debts have called European navies, plausi- 
bly to friendly reyiews in South American harbors, really 
to dictate terms of payment, and force loans with op- 
pressive conditions, making the industries of those 
States too poor to co-operate for profitable exchange 
with other American States. The Monroe doctrine can- 
not be maintained, unless American institutions are first 
kept alive for protectien of American labor. The policy 
of the party in power paves the way for European in- 
terference that cannot be questioned, because monopoly 
will take no steps to defend American labor. 

If American labor had had full protection of its prof- 
its from the incipiency of the Federal relation, it is a 
proper conclusion to affirm that it would not have been 
so poor that it was made to suffer a marauding infliction 
of the British navy that wantonly destroyed the defense- 
less archives at Washington in the war of 1812. 

The present tariff is covertly assisting in this subjuga- 



79 

tion of American liberties to European domination of 
debt. Tory landlord aristocracy of Europe, allied with 
the seeds of Toryism — of a society built upon American 
landlord aristocracy — left to grow in America after the 
revolution, is circumventing American liberties, by con- 
trolling political policies at Washington, in defiance of 
public interests, through political conditions of non- 
resident wealth. It failed to accomplish this by the war 
of the revolution. It goes into the market, buys, owns 
and pairs off venal votes against those of American labor 
cast to regain its liberties. 

Its ally and co-worker has been the British Whig 
aristocracy of manufacturi^ng and commercial wealth, 
advocating Cobden principles of free trade for adoption 
by America. Both these policies are against the liber- 
ties of American industry. 

The party in power has been hand in hand with these 
foreign agencies, going just far enough to establish 
American aristocracies of the same kind. It permits 
enough of the Cobden Club principles of free trade to 
suit its own monopoly interests. That is, it permits 
enough foreign manufacturers to have free trade in 
American markets for their products, for custom duties to 
get penalties for revenue out of the wages of American 
toilers, as consumers, so that American landlords shall 
have their profits out of penalties on raw materials used 
for home manufacture. 

Free raw materials and a duty on foreign manufac- 
tures against aU the nations that accumulate their wealth 
by servile labor, will not only destroy Cobden Club prin- 
ciples of free trade in America, but destroy it in the 
British empire, to hold any foreign commerce, compet- 



80 

ing with American free-labor foreign commerce. The 
British naval power will count for nought in this con- 
tcjst. This is a far more profitable policy than to build 
an American navy. 

American landlord monopoly is attained by having 
tariff restrictions against British monopoly manufactures 
that are American labor's necessities, because bounties 
to these American monopolies make American substi- 
tutes cost as much as those imported with custom pen- 
alties added. They become absolute necessities, there- 
fore, because American labor has not the free trade 
products that home manufacturers can use, having no 
use for them, because taxed into a limited home market. 
Not having any other products than wheat, cotton, &c.,, 
these are used to buy where they can get a market for 
their sale, by taking British exchange. In the mean 
time, every other class of American consumers, which 
embraces a much larger quantity, must buy at home, 
selling their products, like wool, for example, at a poor 
price, because of no market at all abroad. These pro- 
ducts sell too low, and buy American manufactures 
having landlord bounties charged up in prices. The 
fact that the products they have to sell for these manu- 
factures are also charged bounties in cost of production 
only makes their net value still poorer. The tariff being 
for revenue, not for protection, enough of Cobden Club 
principles of trade are established, by having the tariff 
just low enough to suit American monopoly interests ; 
that is, make American labor that experts raw materials 
pay the revenue, and the balance charged on American 
consumers goes to American landlord monopolies. To 
more effectually secure this consummation, taxes by in- 
ternal revenue are being cut off. 



81 

How the aristocracy of monopoly hates the very name 
of " liberty" and " free trade " ! It derides them to the 
American labor which supports it, and hires the party 
in power to hiss the words in contempt during Presiden- 
tial campaigns, in the ears of American industry. It 
however, depends on the venal vote as the balance of 
power to secure perpetual electoral majorities. 

How long before outraged American labor will lift its 
emblem of free trade and sailors' rights, in peaceful 
commerce all over the world — that emblem now trailed 
in the dust. When will it carry the olive branch of 
peace, liberty, protection, contentment as a well-provided 
Christian industry, to the shores of toilers oppressed 
by monopolies. Will the time soon have come when 
those oppressed industries shall dare, in the face of ty- 
rants, to cover the cannon that would frown dowm on 
American free trade — of equal, mutual exchange, per- 
haps needing a navy to defend its commerce abroad, 
when American free trade shall offer it in all the harbors 
of the world, with all its disturbing influence of unrest 
for oppressed labor, if it does not need a navy for home 
protection. 

American — not foreign — free trade, was essentially 
Alexander Hamilton's idea, he appreciating the political 
fact that wealth produced from untaxed-for bounties 
American natural resources, would always be better 
than the wealth of Europe to its producers, where the 
idle classes appropriated the national profits for their 
living. He also claimed that the federal protection from 
all bounties, was protection thereby of the profits to 
American labor. This was the corner stone of their 
successful foreign commerce of free trade, whether com- 
6 



82 

peting against the taxed-for-beuefit-of-monopolies' pro- 
ducts of Europe, or those of Asia. He did not fear the 
competition of the servile, cheap, degraded-labor product. 
No other but the products of free industry, could com- 
pete with American free trade. Now, however, a politi- 
cal party gets its support and installment into power on 
condition it will make the Federal government a sup- 
porter of certain monopolies of raw materials, so that 
these can by a forced exchange, tax the profits of Amer- 
ican producers and consumers only. 

The immigration that this party fosters, is that which 
will contract to work for less wages than are the political 
right, and for the honor of American citizenship. 

There is a popular political error, used with some ef- 
fect in Presidential campaigns. It is, that tariff restric- 
tion penalties come out of the foreign producer, not out 
of the domestic consumer. American labor is disposed 
to believe this. It draws its conclusions from the fact 
that its own. exports of raw materials sell for what only 
yields poor wages to their producers. 

The reason is, that they compete in an unnatural mar- 
ket with the products of the servile labor of the world? 
where they are sent, not to obtain profits on production, 
but to pay foreign debts. They are therefore sold by 
the creditor. They are practically sold " under the rule" 
for what they will bring, other competing products of 
servile labor making their price. Their own natural 
market — at home — where there is no servile labor com- 
petition under unviolated American institutions, is de- 
stroyed by the policy of a party platform which says 
that no part of the present policy shall be abandoned. 
American labor for self-protection will therefore be com- 



83 

pelled to abandon that parfcv, by keeping it in an elect- 
oral minority. 

Opposition political parties out of power, may well 
look to their laurels. At this late day of the awakening 
of American labor to its political and natural rights, as 
Jefferson taught and Washington defended, localities 
must not be yielded the promise of protection of private 
or landlord-monopoly interests, in order ta secure elect- 
oral majoritios. If there is one monopoly left, it be- 
comes dictator. It alone gets all the net profits or cap- 
ital. Labor is therefore not emancipated, but servile, 
in its political and industrial status — none the less so 
because of fewer monopolies. 

If half of American labor emigrated under present po- 
litical conditions, that left would not have more wealth. 
Even labor unions could not make monopoly enough to 
retain profits to labor. Non-production and non-con- 
sumption is the status of any thing beyond what yield 
profits to monopolies. Labor would still be poor. The 
same conditions would prevail if labor was doubled in 
supply. No profits to labor in any event. A depletion 
of laborers wouJd result in an increased cost of living to 
compensate for any increased wages from scarcity of 
labor. 

At present Great Britain's aristocracies of wealth, as 
a ruling class, have much in favor of perpetuating impe- 
rialism over British labor, by her tariff for revenue and 
her credit of the Bank of England for currency. This 
advantage in their favor is because so many govern- 
ments aid, by their own greater monopolies of natural 
resources. 

All of Great Britain's commercial greatness, is for the 



84 

aggrandizement of her monopolies, not for the inde- 
pendence and wealth of the producers of her wealth. 
Her greatest help to give her people at home employ- 
ment, so that they can produce what they receive with- 
out being a public charge on monopolies, is the fact of 
the opening of her markets, as the only ones in the 
world for free trade in raw materials and thereby draw- 
ing all the world's servile-labor raw materials under her 
political rule. 

All other nations tax their protection of wealth and 
thereby restrict home manufactures, so these cannot be 
exported for interchange between neutral nations, al- 
though some are exported for mutual exchange. 

By this policy the surplus of the world's raw materials 
comes to her markets, and through them exchange for 
their imported necessities from neutral nations. She 
buys them therefore so cheap that she can give her ser- 
vile labor employment, and with the manufactures pro- 
duced, buy all these foreign exchanges in neutral mar- 
kets, those of tea, coffee, &c., cheaper than can be done 
otherwise by the industries needing them. 

Almost all governments of the Americas by constitu- 
tions in some form or other, have secured full political 
protection of the profits of labor from absorption by 
landlord or other entailments on them. This constitu- 
tional protection, however, has been violated by political 
parties in power under contests for political rule and 
spoils of office, until landlord entailments and other mo- 
nopolies have been made, by means of tariff restrictions. 
Eailroad debts are the principle modern forms of these 
entailments on free trade. In some cases, by railroad 



85 

subsidies, making the debt a part of the financial 
budget. 

The political remedies for all these infringements on 
the protection of the fundamental law, rest solely with 
the people, who have the political power for voting on 
matters affecting public policy ; demonstrating the 
amount of Christian development that renders them ca- 
pable of self-government as a co-operative society — that 
kind of government that does protect, as by its constitu- 
tion it agrees to do — that does not permit monopoly 
representation to pair itself off — the venal vote repre- 
senting it — with labor representation and thus withhold 
the protection constitutionally due to labor. 

Tariff restrictions against those products of servile 
labor, that are not raw materials of any kind from which 
American industry can be self-employed co-operatively, 
enable American labor to save its profits, as capital that 
can make its products become export, fi-ee trade manu- 
factures. They do not close up manufactories and pre- 
vent employment at all, but open them all up and secure 
profitable labor for American industries. They do not 
force a currency of servile products for domestic and 
foreign exchanges, and therefore do not create a debt 
owing by its industry for its subsistence, requiring all 
its future profits to be paid as interest on that debt, be- 
cause its products have too poor a market to extinguish 
it, causing thereby its children to be born only to cruel 
toil for bare necessities, from the dawn to the closing- 
scenes among all that is beneficent under the law of Cre- 
ative power and delightful in nature, carrying a pall of 
perpetual debt to them as the only ragged mantle of 
protection inherited from degraded parentage. 



86 

Monopolies ask subsidies to partly pay carrying 
charges for manufactures, acquired from toil of servile 
American, and unnaturalized imported, alien, servile 
contract labor at less than value, to South America and 
other countries. At the same time they maintain that 
Europe can make manufactures — because of less cost of 
labor — cheaper than America can, and that on this ac- 
count there must be tariff restrictions against them. 
This shows that their whole policy is, to prevent Ameri- 
can industry from getting profits out of exports, as it is 
not permitted to out of home manufactures. 

Good American profits for labor and bounties to 
American lordships cannot stand together. One must 
prevail to the loss of the other. Which shall it be ? is 
the issue of the age. Political parties must stand or fall 
on that issue. A little less measure of monopoly op- 
pression, advocated by one party then another, will not 
do. If monopoly is right, sustain it. If wrong, Ameri- 
can industry, on principle, must crush it to save itself 
from toil and degradation. To secure wealth to itself 
it must protect against imperial abstractions of profits 
by monopolies, or give up its wealth to them as an in- 
come class. American labor cannot afford to be tam- 
pered with by any " monkey deals " of political parties, 
no matter with what subtlety they are concealed. 

American consumers would be able to purchase some 
things cheaper than at present, yet the value of Ameri- 
can wealth in every form would be less under such con- 
ditions of international free trade as the Cobden Club 
advocates ; but by protecting American industry's free 
trade through exclusion of such international free trade, 
living would be cheaper than Cobden Club ways provide. 



87 

Lackeys of monopoly will have cold comfort, and shall 
not be permitted to claim that the present conditions of 
taxation of American production are better than the 
Cobden principles of free trade are. The latter, of the 
two last named conditions, is at least no worse if not 
better than present conditions. American protection of 
its Federal rights of free trade for its own labor under 
the constitution is, however, far better than either of 
the two conditions referred to. 

British foreign commerce is monopolistic only. It has 
no essence of co-operation in it. It only works oppres- 
sion of labor, to the political position of a degraded, 
toiling class, where it exists — to the labor of the countries 
it free trades with, as well as that at home. It can have 
fi-ee trade and exist only, because other governments are 
more imperial than the British government is, only be- 
cause raw materials are free in Great Britain. Witness 
the oppression of American labor in its own attempts at 
foreign trade, in competition with British foreign com- 
merce, through the violation of its law of protection by 
the policy of the party in power to serve British monop- 
oly foreign commerce interests. 

Therefore any American foreign commerce developed 
by subsidies, with no relief from oppressions on its home 
free trade, would be as imperial over the natural rights 
of American labor as British foreign commerce is over 
labor affected by its system. Subsidies, with foreign 
outlet they would make, is not the protection of the 
rights of American labor, for which the contract of the 
Federal relation provides. They would only add to its 
oppressions to the extent the tax for subsidies calls for 
fresh levies on their wealth. Labor's profits would still 



88 

be nil. Monopoly political conditions would absorb 
them. 

In building up American foreign commerce by means 
of subsidies, it must be for monopoly gain only Ameri- 
can industry will continue getting poor wages. The 
policy of monopoly is first of all to secure.the negro vote, 
and control it ; then hold it perpetually, as the balance 
of power. The program for this purpose is, to control, 
from Washington, State electix)ns. This is not to be 
done as the constitution intended, for federation pur- 
poses, which is, to preserA^e to the people of the States 
a republican form of government for protection of indi- 
vidual rights of wealth. It is to secure electoral major- 
ities by the venal vote, that will override the will and 
rights of the States, and so control the methods of labor 
as to absorb its profits into power over it. 

The means of exercising imperial power over the 
States is to be by the cat's-paw of the Federal officers 
interfering with the free vote of the people — not securing 
it — creating unlawfiil disabilities — the monopoly power 
at Washington to decide without appeal — the venal vote 
to be put in the balances in their favor. Succeeding in 
this, they propose to starve American industry into tak- 
ing lower wages than the industry of Europe, by still 
greater tariff restrictions ; increasing the power and 
number of monopoly interests, to thereby enable these 
monopolists to have profits to themselves and be a 
stronger political power for perpetuating electoral ma- 
jorities. 

Where will then come in short hours, freedom, pros- 
perity and the elevation of American labor ? What will 
then be the standard of citizenship ? 



89 

President Washington was verj explicit about tlie 
principles of taxation, to be forever a part of American 
institutions, that after taxing imported dispensables or 
luxuries, only enough so that any more would rather re- 
strict than protect American free trade abroad, to stop 
before that result, and tax internally home-made spirits. 
His justification was that imported spirits were under 
tariff restrictions. There was then no system of the 
national wealth developed that was held in trust for 
public uses, subject only to Federal control, as railroads 
now are, from which revenue could be drawn from a 
percentage of their receipts, which would be an assess- 
ment on the income of capital for public uses. There 
would then be no oppression of labor, if it owned the 
profits of its labor as its capital and paid the revenue 
out of the profits of capital and be thereby free from 
any charge on the production of this capital for x^rivate 
interests. He believed that this system of tariff re- 
strictions made an equality in right of the wealth af- 
fected, in the spirit of voluntary reciprocity and fair 
dealing, not being fettered, however, by reciprocity 
treaties or entangling alliances, particularly those that 
would prevent the exercise of the Monroe doctrine first 
announced by himself. Thereby in the interests of peace 
and the brotherhood of man, he would induce other na- 
tions to court amity by these overt acts of comity, and 
thus protect in the paths of peace, from all over and 
unequal taxation of the wealth of American labor, either 
at home or at)road, and avoid all spirit of dissatisfaction 
in the States, with the establishment of the Federal re- 
lation, by this protection from all over, unequal, unjust, 
oppressive taxations and restrictions on American for- 



90 

eign free trade, to enable all American industries sever- 
ally to acquire full value in exchange for the wealth 
American labor produced, for the profit of producers 
only, and the wealth of every State community, inde- 
pendently of its neighbor. State industries being thereby 
free from debt and all obligations for unprofitable pen- 
alties to the outside world. 

Tariff restrictions, limited to dispensables or luxuries, 
would only decrease importation of servile labor, also 
of raw materials. It would increase immigration of co- 
operative skilled labors to use home raw materials. It 
would force alien and American monopoly appropriators 
of American natural monopolies to put them to public 
<30-operative uses, as they could not get bounties out of 
American labor's capital by withholding them from free 
trade. They could get profits only by co-operating with 
American labor. They would get no use of them at all 
except by co-operation. There would thereby be no 
income from them except the natural income from use 
of capital. They would then rely on public uses for 
profits — not on restrictions of penalties for public uses 
in which as the party in power now protects them. 

Degraded American labor submits to this imposition, 
and lets them take all it can beyond bare subsistence. 
When monopolists are forced from their strongholds — 
one and all — their own profits will be better. This will 
not be so if only a part of them are abandoned. Fewer 
would then exercise the imperial taxing power of boun- 
ties. * 

Southern slave-holding monopolists had their monop- 
oly wealth of sugar, hemp, tobacco, &c., produced under 
a contract with the State, rendering labor a very small 



91 

return for the valuable wealth it produced. The pres- 
ent monopolists, nationalizing themselves by denation- 
alizing all the liberties of American citizenship of any 
value, have their iron, coal, lumber, &c., produced 
largely by imported, contract, or servile labor. Ameri- 
can labor is thereby denaturalized of its political rights 
that would, if free in the exercise of them, be independ- 
ent and able to destroy these monopolies. 

There is thereunder not so much wealth to buy A\ith 
at home as if the surplus of raw materials is sent to 
Europe. It would have more value at home to Ameri- 
can labor with the law of the Federal relation for its 
protection from penalties unviolated — if silver, lead,, 
copper, wheat, cotton, &c., were not embargoed free 
trade at home — by charges on their original production,, 
and also on manufacturers. Monopolized coal, iron, 
lumber, &c., prevents American manufacturers being 
able to merge these products of American labor all to- 
gether, into manufactures and ships, and with these 
make direct exchange by American commerce for all 
imports. American producers of wealth therefore get 
less of the profits arising from them. 

They are debarred making a better, free-trade market 
at home for all American raAV materials, also for foreign 
exchanges of manufactures thus obtained, and giving 
more employment to American labor in cities, as well as 
more wealth, property or capital for that labor, enabling 
it to be better patron of American farms, mines, rail- 
roads, street car roads, telegraphs, telephones, (fee, re- 
lieving American industry from over and unequal taxa- 
tion for support of the government under a tariff for 
revenue out of it, taxing only income from capital for 
that revenue. 



92 

The higher duties are on imported raw materials, the 
higher they must be on manufactures to prevent import- 
ations, and thereby enable — not laborers engaged in 
manufacturing to profit, but — monopolies of American 
raw materials to force American manufacturers to pay 
more profits for these raw materials, and to charge them 
up to duty line on American co-laborers as consumers, 
and secure all there is to be had of this kind of protec- 
tion — in bounties to them — not profits to American labor. 

Then the higher the duties on raw materials, the 
higher they must correspondingly be on manufactures 
to give employment to American manufactures for home 
consumption, but not at any profits. This policy does 
not improve the value of wealth American labor receives. 
None of the profits received from American consumers 
through these enhanced prices goes to American labor, 
but all to monopolies. American labor by this protec- 
tion of monopolies is left out in the cold. The higher 
the duties on raw materials, therefore, the richer mo- 
nopolies get, while labor gets only a bare living, in any 
such anti- Christian event. American labor cannot get 
good wages of profits while there are duties on raw ma- 
terials, and American monopolies are thus protected in 
getting the profits that are produced by it out of Ameri- 
can consumers. No wonder income people live in Eu- 
rope under an American high tariff, and spend American 
wealth abroad. They are not to be found fault with, 
but the law is the cause of this wrong. When an Amer- 
ican tariff is on raw materials it is for revenue only, not 
for protection, therefore as consumers these income 
people Avould be caught as American labor is, by staying 
at home. The law says to any such laggards that do 



93 

not escape to Europe, "Stand up and deliver," just as 
corralled American labor and local capital does. 

Cheaper domestic raw materials, on account of less 
custom duties on the imported, will be made into neces- 
sary substitutes, and supplant foreign dispensables or 
luxuries, because their likes or substitutes are made 
cheap at home. Income people will then spend their 
Avealth at home. These imported products that would 
be termed luxuries or dispensables, under a free trade 
protection of American products — because their substi- 
tutes made at home would be cheap in cost, yet furnish 
good wages to their producers — at once become necessi- 
ties to American consumers, if bounty charges prevent 
their being made as cheap at home. Paying duties on 
them — bounty charges prevailing by taiiff on raw ma- 
terials — is making a tariff for revenue, with no element 
of protection, except of monopolies. The importation 
of raw materials benefits the value of other American 
wealth, only in order to break down bounty prices for 
American monopolized raw material, to give emploj/- 
ment to American industry, in making substitutes for 
imported manufactures, and not be obliged to send so 
many crude products out of the country to sell for less 
than they are worth, to pay for foreign exchanges ; at 
the same time be idle because not using them to manu- 
facture at home, thereby not earning wealth in making 
manufactures that would exchange for foreign imports, 
to thus keep out of foreign debt. 

One laborer having a monopoly against all other la- 
borers, because they are not present to underbid him, 
will not under the government's protection of landlord 
monopolies, by tariff restrictions for revenue, earn as 



94 

;much for himself as one hundred laborers m the same 
territory, each for himself, under government protection 
of the rights of free trade in American wealth. Monop- 
olies get the profits of the one, while the hundred retain 
the profits to themselves. 

The hundred laborers, paying natural free trade cost 
of raw materials, do not glut the market with the in- 
creased products offered therein. They being on an 
equality, become co-operative exchanges for self-inter- 
est, and thereby do increase the value of all, each for 
Jiimself. Thereby each possesses more wealth to him- 
self, because he has retained the profits. These profits 
are his capital. With this retention of them, he can 
make labor co-operate with capital, not be at war with 
it, as is now the fact. He has his own capital, saving 
the charge of interest for use of credit, and is self-em- 
ployed and independent. 

Therefore free trade in raw materials is capable of 
development by industry into a great increase of manu- 
factures for home and foreign exchange, giving opera- 
tives or laborers good wages, because the profits of 
manufacture are shared. 

Each producer has more to spare to exchange with 
other laborers for their products, which they, in this 
lawfully protected condition, pay for and own free from 
debt. 

The hundred laborers do not by competition put down 
the value of the wealth they produce and own, because 
there is an ample market under free trade conditions for 
all produced, at its t'uU value, but rather increase by co- 
operation the net value of each several forms, until 
natural value for all is attained, causing no over-produc- 



95 

tion, no over-consumption — no under-production, no 
under-consumption. 

The one laborer can retain only a part of the wealth 
he produces, because tariff restrictions have put bars, 
protecting exclusive possession of what are the common 
sources of wealth free for all labor to use for the public 
good, for the benefit of private interests only, and there- 
by bars against American free trade to get anywhere 
else. The penalties, for violating the unlawful restric- 
tions on this laborer's free trade, come out of his wealth 
entirely. This is the cause of his poverty, yet is the 
means of supporting income aristocracy. 

There then becomes stagnation in trade, from poverty 
of profits or wealth in the hands of labor to incite in- 
creased production of wealth by less labor through the 
co-operative use of these profits. Landlord taxation is 
the sole cause, monopolizing the profits labor produced 
— by its rent charges — and refusing their use for co- 
operation, but only to extort profits from labor. 

It is not because there are more laborers than neces- 
sary to produce the products for the demand, but because 
monopolies tax away their profits, that forces theui to 
live as non-consumers — only on what poor wages will 
bring. 

American industry is now deprived of the means of 
producing the profits or wealth with which to exchange 
for other profits or wealth. Wealth will not be pro- 
duced without demand. Demand will not be adequate 
without there are free trade profits — that is, they are 
retained by the labor producing them to use and thereby 
make the demand. 

The monopolist of natural resources is not anxious to 



96 

force production beyond home wants until Avages of 
American labor get lower still, and it will do without: 
carpets on the floors of its tenement home, &c., because 
that would force down bounty prices, consequently land- 
lord bounty rents. If to an export basis, these natural 
resources would be without bounty profits. This would 
bring all raw materials for home consumption to the 
same level of prices. Art would then flourish in America, 
and income people of the world would visit America to 
see its treasures of co-operative wealth and industrial 
greatness. American income people, not forced to ex- 
patriation by penalty charges on cost of living, would 
spend their income at home, possessing American art 
treasures of wealth. 

The monopolist, with traditional rather than educa- 
tional preferences, prefers high tariffs to secure his 
wealth by bounties exacted out of the oppressions of 
labor, preferring no foreign intercourse, except as he 
visits abroad, but to live in such barbarous magnificence 
as servile conditions of industry generate. The present 
laws for enforcing penalties out of American labor as 
fast as the profits on its products can be available, makes 
it pay better to do nothing but become from the stage 
of a law protected monopolist, a full fledged bond-holder, 
by securing bonds for greenbacks. 

This robbery among others is seen exemplified in the 
agricultural interests in this fashion. After a generation 
of toil, the farmers who once owned surplus capital in- 
vested in American industries, have worked hard, hav- 
ing denied themselves too much for their own good, and 
having suffered too much in the degradation of their 
family prospects to a servile, peasantry condition, have 



97 

not even paid expenses, but have been obliged to mort- 
gage their natural monopolies and wealth of improve- 
ments to balance their expense accounts, after selling 
all their farm produce below value, because of a taxed- 
trade, limited home market. 

There is no good reason why a farmer who is careful 
in using his natural monopolies that the privileges of 
American citizenship has blessed him with, should not 
have peace and plenty. His present misfortune is, that 
after having mortgaged all his wealth, he is not able to 
pay the penalties of usury on the bonds he has executed. 
If not mortgaged for private debts, he is still unable to 
pay carrying charges, costing enough out of his wealth 
to support a foreign income aristocracy, that owns the 
bonds on the railroads, the party in powet' impoverished 
him into selling. 

Later on — under present rule over political rights, 
which prevents American farm produce from being mar- 
ketable at home, for a demand to be merged into manu- 
factures to exchange for imported tea, coffee, &c., to there- 
by have these at less cost of American wheat, cotton, (fec^ 
than the present tariff restrictions on American free trade 
for revenue only permits, American farming interests will 
be mere tenantry. Idle income people as a perpetual 
political condition will be living on their labor. Them- 
selves will be getting only very poor wages, no better 
than those provided for tillers of the soil in Europe. 

This noble industry is already so degraded, that it is 
growing weaker under its burdens, until exhaustion and 
depopulation are occurring, as witness Vermont and 
New Hampshire. The conditions are spreading, and 
result as in Ireland — more pastures — more preserve.«i for 
7 



98 

income aristocracy, \yitli less resident population, and 
that dependent on industry only because starved out of 
its profits, a migration to new countries, or those like 
Africa where the conqueror rules. The political causes 
are the same in all countries that produce these results 
— monopoly power controlling the production of wealth. 

The natural dignity, obeying Creative law, of the labor 
or industry of agriculture, pervaded the whole being of 
Horation Seymoar, implying education, honor and pros- 
perity. He was not permitted to see it in his day, be- 
cause party policies, in which the wealth of New York 
was not protected but devastated by political powders at 
Washington to suit the demands of private interests or 
monopolies prevailed to such an extent as to produce a 
rupture betw^een New York and the Federal relation, by 
New York declining to be represented as a State, or be 
a party to devastation of the national wealth the people 
had produced for their ow^n comfort, by appropriation 
to support of ruling income classes, that have only un- 
lawful being where American institutions prevail. 

The wealth of improvements, on American natural 
monopolies, to enable American labor to accumulate 
wealth from these sources, consisting of manufactories, 
mines, railroads, canals, cities, harbors, &c., that might 
also be wealth of dignity, honor and prosperity to this 
labor's family estate of New" fork, among all the other 
States, have been devastated for the same treasonable 
purposes by the party in power. 

American labor having produced and possessed this 
national wealth, under guardianship of State's conserva- 
tion for the great co-operative interests of the w^hole, 
has been obliged to bond and mortgage it all, under a 



99 

contract to provide a perpetual debt of interest to a rul- 
ing income class. The powers at Washington say it 
must be so, and control the wealth of the States to have 
it so. A contingent in this State protests and says this 
must not be. Those of this State enjoying the spoils of 
office, aid this servile condition, even to drumming in 
the venal vote in Presidential elections. Estates of the 
Astors are as much bonded as the one estate to hold the 
family together, compelling higher rents, with no power 
of the possessors to prevent. The costs all come out 
of the savings of American labor, and go through the 
hands of the Astors, for one instance, to pay bounties 
to monopolies, which have made their improvements cost 
so much. 

The producers of this wealth so bonded, see it grow- 
ing into less value every year to them. It is more es- 
tranged from them. It is made to tower over and frown 
on them — the office holders, the retainers of monopolies, 
being the army to carry out American insolvency and 
evictions. The real value of wealth in the State of New 
York is becoming absolutely nil to American labor pro- 
ducing it, the monopolist, as a scalper on poor labor's 
necessities — obliging poor, struggling American labor to 
pawn all its valuables for present needs — taking it all — 
Pharao buying Israel. 

There is another political result. A farmer may have 
his improvements out of private debt, as well as the 
Astors. Like them, he cannot prosper under a govern- 
ment whose oppressions cause any portion of his neigh- 
bor's wealth to be sold out to monopolists. These im- 
provemenis are then bought far below their legal tender 
value, as penalties for debt. How can the farmer have 



100 

profits for use of his wealth of natural monopolies and 
improvements, when the monopolist has been able to 
buy his neighbor's farm below cost as a penalty for a 
mortgage debt. The monopolist's investment is less, 
therefore he can get good profits at selling his produce 
at less profits than his neighbor who has been enabled 
to keep out of debt by denying himself everything he 
could not pay for out of his poor wages, no matter how 
much wrong the government has done him by forcing 
this parsimony. He must then do as his neighboring 
tenant does, take only subsistence for his labor. 

The value of American wealth to its producers — not 
monopolies — after all, is determined by the fact of how 
much it is over and unequally taxed in cost of produc- 
tion out of its profits for penalties or bounties to sup- 
port an income aristocracy founded on monopolies. Its 
value is not determined at all, as some suppose, by the 
measure of its protection as monopolies, nor how 
cheap a servile labor may be forced to work in America 
— even having the whole free trade of the home market. 
The law not protecting all labor producing wealth from 
penalties, those getting the penalties or bounties, get all 
the profits. The others get all the losses. The former 
owns the capital of the nation doing nothing. The latter 
Is sim]Dly a toiler, having no capital. He has parted 
with his profits or capital for penalties or bounties. 

The policy of the party in power says he must submit, 
and his children be still more degraded. 

Federal institutions would protect him,but he ignorant- 
ly trusts political power to a party that violates his priv- 
ileges under the law. If it only pays the Presidential 
campaign expenses, he appears to be satisfied, and says^ 



101 

give me National instead of State bank currency — and 
does not think further — that his own greenback currency 
is better. He does not apprehend that the currency 
made by the whole nation on its guarantee, and is paid 
for, is better than that made by protected monopolies, 
costing usury for its use. The former enables him to 
retain profits as his own wealth or capital. The latter 
currency enables the monopolies, the party in power has 
established, to rob him of his profits, leaving him only 
poor wages. 

Let the American laborer settle this question in his 
own favor, instead of supporting political parties bent 
on the spoils of office. He will then vote for that polit- 
ical party of his own make-up, which will protect the 
rights of his citizenship. Then there will be neither 
wealth produced for export, nor for domestic uses, that 
will not pay him profits, to be his own wealth, beyond 
what they cost him to produce, whether from farm, mine, 
quarries, brick yards, ^manufactory, city, harbor, rail- 
road, telegraph, telephone, street raih^oad, printing- 
plant, and every conceivable investment. 

No wonder that the monopoly political parties of 
Europe and Canada w^ere in sympathy with the landlord 
monopoly power of the South in the late American civij 
war. They preferred a rule of monopoly in form of 
slavery, together with free trade under Cobden Club 
principles, than an American free-trade indvistry that 
would have no equal free-trade exchanges with any mo- 
nopoly commerce dealing only in the products of servile 
labor. 

These historic facts explain why the party in power 
has the best wishes of the monopoly party of Canada, as 



102 

well as the Britisli foreign commerce monopoly Cobden 
Club party. The American party of monopoly is cajoled 
in Europe, because its policy kills all American foreign 
competition in Cobden Club free trade with neutral na- 
tions. It forces American labor, because not manufac- 
turing for export, to raise a surplus of raw materials 
with which to buy its foreign exchanges. 

When any swaggering American politician " does 
Europe," he is told how much this nation is admired. 
Europe is wonderfully impressed with the energy of 
American industry, which is capable of supporting such 
a large affluent class in Europe by the profits it pro- 
duces, while incidentally earning itself a poor subsist- 
ence. 

At this praise, in which contempt is poorly concealed, 
American labor comes out of its shop into the street in 
its leather apron, its breath rank with dyspepsia from 
degrading toil, and shouts applause in ignorant delight. 

It makes no difference that Mr. Gladstone has been 
frank enough in the abundance of his real love for what 
he believes is Christian America, to explain the violation 
of the rights of free trade inflicted on American liberty. 

He has, however, in the greatest frankness, submitted 
facts in the spirit of contemplating a generous rivalry of 
competition for foreign trade — American manufactures 
being the factor — by expecting the intelligence of the 
American people will, with true Yankee sagacity, read 
between the lines, that their only course to secure the 
free trade for American manufactures at home and 
abroad, is to boot the present political party out of the 
back door at Washington, and install new conservitors 
of their heritage of freedom for labor into power. 



Monopolists only wish that American industry might 
be as wise as gods in the knowledge of producing the 
greatest amount of wealth by labor-saving devices, even 
establishing technical schools therefor. It wishes it to 
be blind however, as to its political rights to obtain 
profits in a free-trade exchange for those it produces, 
yet having carpets on its floors, <fec., for Presidential 
campaign purposes only, so that they might crow over 
the " softer snap " they have on an industry, that is ca- 
pable of producing, for them, more wealth than Euro- 
pean industry for the same labor ; requiring European 
monopolists to feed and clothe more heads of population, 
thereby making less net profit out of their servile indus- 
try. The same as slave owners would have been com- 
pelled to do, to the extent of making slave labor un- 
profitable, compared with Northern labor, if it had not 
been servile to paying bounties to Southern monopolists, 
so its Northern politicians could hold Federal oflSces. 
New York labor is paying its profits in bounties now, 
so that her politicians may hold Federal ofiic6s. Her 
labor is therefore getting no profits. 

Poor, pagan, long-eared, degraded American industry 
that cannot see through a millstone after even Mr. Glad- 
stone has, with his political axe, made the hole still 
larger, wiping out the cobwebs monopolists have em- 
ployed their lackeys in power to so industriously cover 
over it. 

Is it possible American citizenship v/ill never redeem 
itself into the rights it has lost ? That it will voluntarily, 
for a poor, servile-labor price, deliver its own offspring, 
of coming generations, into the bondage of perpetual 
debt, periodically laying down its profits as tribute to 



104 

support an income aristocracj — not providing for its 
own household, being worse than an infidel — denying its 
faith in American institutions ? What is the use of 
public schools and temporal religious establishments, 
when monopolies degrade American citizenship faster 
than these institutions can reclaim it ? 

Where tariff restrictions are laid on products of any 
kind that prevents American wealth attaining full free- 
trade value at home and abroad, this is a wrong such has 
ever been practiced to force wealth from industry with- 
out equivalent exchange for revenue only, with which 
to carry on wars, against the interest of the supporters 
of the State — the industrial classes — for the spoils of 
office, and for luxurious dissipations of a pagan sort 
abroad, consuming dispensables or luxuries. 

This impoverished industry suffers from it, even with 
all its labor-saving devices, that enable it to produce so 
many more products, suitable for its comfort and good, 
for so little labor, but which it must thereby be. forced 
to part with, to support an hydra-headed income aris- 
tocracy, having its body in Europe with one head. The 
other head is in America, to see that the political j^arty 
in power does fealty to its master. 

It is impossible for American industry to have free 
trade in its domestic exchanges, by relief from all mo- 
nopoly of raw materials, unless there at once becomes 
an export free trade for American manufactures all over 
the globe, to exchange in abundance for the wants of 
elevated, educated, refined, moral and religious Ameri- 
can citizenship, using American ships as boards of trade. 

It breaks down landlord monopolies and aristocracies 
of income without production, and effectually establishes 



105 

an era of good civil service by tlie facilities for public 
political virtue it affords, and for civil service reform, 
from the fact of the moral and industrial elevation of 
the people. The present civil service law must neces- 
sarily be ineffectual, like the silver coinage act, the 
inter-State commerce law, laws against trusts, and the 
absence of a bankrupt law as part of the constitution to 
be always in force. These are all used by monopolies, 
■to divert from the real causes that call for the use of 
these counter evils. Why not cut out the mistletoe 
growth of monopoly, rather than make it languish by 
bleeding the tree of its support at the roots ? 

The one absolute Federal duty, for all the sufferings 
inflicted on American labor is, the abolishment of mo- 
nopolies, by not supporting them. 

Hamilton and Jefferson agreed on the question of 
protection, that American laborers of all kinds, including 
manufacturers, must be untaxed in cost of production 
ior support of aristocracy by permitting no monopoly of 
any American raw materials. They aimed thereby to 
protect all alike — American products in being good wages 
because costing less labor to produce them. The ex- 
ception of wool was a measure of safety, to provide the 
then deficienc}^ of war equipment. It was a pure bounty, 
for no other reason than to incite to the production of 
cleared land for pasturage, by a uniform assessment for 
public needs. As soon as supply overtook demand, it 
was believed that producing the wool would pay as well 
as any other products, if not taxed in cost of production 
for private gain. 

Industry being free, there would be no necessity to 
-overproduce. The political condition of debt for inter- 



106 

est as a perpetual charge on the wealth of labor, absorb- 
ing its profits, always forces a production of a surplus, 
without demand — of crude products for export only. 

The vicious practice of making this original precedent 
of protection to wool the reason for protecting private 
instead of public interests, was not intended or even 
entertained. 

It was later on conceded to the monopoly produ.cts of 
slaverv, among others, solely as a compromise of private 
interests, to get electoral majorities in favor of protect- 
ing manufacturers, as the great desideratum. 

If Europe's labor — although it may not have ample 
natural exchanges for the American States — grows richer 
by being freed from charges for support of income 
classes of a kind that restricts labor, it will be better 
able to exchange with American labor, even if the bal- 
ance of its exchanges be money, because it finds more 
natural exchanges with the tropics and Asia for its other 
forms of wealth. 

This free trade condition of Europe would be more 
profitable for America than her present condition of 
protection of monopolies, with production taxed for rev- 
enue only. If America continues her present tariff and 
monopoly system of taxing her own labor for other than 
public uses, European exchanges will then go to other 
nations, or else be concentrated at home, unless loaning 
to draw income from America. The same with Canada 
and Mexico industries. The richer they get, the better 
it might be for American labor. 

Germany by her politico-commercial union of all the 
industries of her many states and conditions into one 
great co-operative combine, eliminating them from their 



107 

over and unequal taxation by employing the agency or 
office of one Federal government, is demonstrating that 
she can produce among the most valuable foreign ex- 
changes of manufactures of any nation. She pays the 
world with these for all her imported products, includ-^ 
ing gold and silver, which she has to acquire from 
abroad. She thereby gives employment to her own labor 
in cities, which otherwise would be idle, and poor patrons 
of the products of farms, mines, quarries, harbors, cities, 
manufactories and public improvements. 

From past ages of political anarchy or disunion, with 
its lack of co-operation, consequent taxation by wars, 
customs and lordships or land monopolies, which have 
been the crucible that has developed German genius, 
her people have been debased, and the profits of their 
wealth devasted, leaving her labor poor. Even now 
there are produced cheap hand-labor products from lack 
of profits or capital, but this era of German industry is 
passing away. 

Germany by her iDresent comprehensive development 
of profits or capital in the hands of her industry, because 
suffering less bounty charges, also her development to- 
wards the protection of foreign free trade for her manu- 
factures by relieving them from the shackles of monopo- 
lies entailed from the past, as fast as permissable without 
disturbing the equilibrium of her trade balances, is 
improving her natural resources with labor-saving facili- 
ties every year. She is thereby making her export 
products harder competitors in the neutral markets of 
the world. 

Her imperial, cardinal policy of protection of the 
profits of wages in the hands of her industry, is by dis- 



108 

mantling long-establisliecl political landlord monopolies, 
and absorbing monopolies of patents. This policy will 
<}lieck rise in prices of products, for the purpose of their 
yielding bounties, rather than profits to labor, with the 
increased demand for their use, caused by their regen- 
erated condition to the present free-trade status, and 
labor-saving means for their production, into more val- 
uable wealth. Germany is rather getting out of debt 
than otherwise, although this is not shown in her budget 
of public expenses, yet she is producing a large surplus 
of wealth to loan other nations, and investing in foreign 
industries, singly and in colonies. 

American aristocracy of monopoly — exercising itself 
in harmony with the landlord and money -of-nations- 
reserve monopolies of Europe — is doing all it ca^ to 
increase the lien on American wealth, to draw support 
thereby to the establishment of an aristocracy of income 
in Europe. This is much to the interference of the 
governments of Europe, including Eussia, in their re- 
forms, as it furnishes a bad precedent for relieving the 
production of their wealth from over and unequal tax- 
ation. 

Monopolies are the fundamental establishments of 
European constitutions, fastened on them in past ages. 
These have to be dealt with, as having a legal status that 
cannot be removed without compensation. Their ac- 
quisitions of wealth and power by their incomes received 
from all the Americas, make them more powerful and 
harder for the monarchies, having in trust the protection 
and justice due the producers of wealth, to abate them. 

Every State must be protected in the natural monop- 
'Oly of its location. The advantages of geographical po- 



109 

sition pertained to New York so much, that her citizens 
who favored the Erie canal feared the Federal relation, 
lest it become imperial. They preferred a free State, 
with no entangling alliances the Federal relation might 
produce, with untrammeled opportunity to open up 
commerce by water ways from the center of the conti- 
nent — making New York city a free-trade port of entry 
for the commerce of the world — the Carthage, Yenice, 
Hamburg, London of the new era. We see the fears of 
the friends of the labor of New York verified by the 
building up of an imperial power at "Washington, which 
annuls the right of all American labor to its own com- 
merce and profits, and flings the threat in the face of 
New York industry that Washington shall control the 
wealth it produces. 

But for such a policy of destruction of Federal rights 
and co-operation, there must and would be several times 
the wealth owned by New York labor, paying profits. 
Every farmer, manufacturer, canal and railroad laborer 
would be richer. What there is, is bonded for debt. Hers 
should be free-trade wealth — from all charges of per- 
petual debt of interest, to be produced by this labor as 
positive penalty for presuming to own it. 

There is not a cent owned by the citizenship of New 
York that does not contribute its equal percentage to 
the payment of the perpetual debt of usury for support 
of alien, income aristocracies. 

Every State must be protected, according to the prin- 
ciples of the Federal constitution, in her sovereign, 
primary policy of acquiring enough of naturally-distrib- 
uted wealth in every form and variety necessary for the 
public good, by imperially protecting the citizen in all 



110 

the natural rights that the Federal relation agrees to 
protect him in. 

States must not be subjected to the imperial interests 
of monopolies at Washington, beyond their power of 
redress. They must not suffer depreciation of wealth 
without equivalent, through political causes, that their 
Tote can correct. They must have a race, free for all^ 
irom unfair inequality for wealth and prosperity with- 
out the government putting a premium on monopoly. 

If States are absolutely free in their rights of wealth, 
if they have free trade to get equivalent for the fruits of 
their labor, there will then be a generous emulation to 
secure the educated classes in skilled, scientific and 
labor-saving industry, for population — rather than mere 
tenantry-toilers— together with the greatest possible share 
of the prosperity that free wealth endows. 

Each State, in electing its Federal representatives, 
must be free from obstructions made by incumbent. 
Federal, electoral majorities. These must not buy the 
venal vote in close contests. Every State's needs and 
interests must be protected from devastation by party 
rule at Washington. The interest of some must not be 
sacrificed for the purpose of preserving a national or- 
ganization of electoral majority party combinations, 
armed with an iron-clad policy, to not have the line of 
the onslaught for spoils of ofiice broken, as was done in 
Webster's time, by his voting to sacrifice New England's 
foreign commerce, under the Henry Clay system of mo- 
nopoly protection. The electoral majority which he 
supported was wholly dependent on representation of 
the amalgamation of local monopoly interests. The 
great public interests had no majority representation. 



Ill 

The policy of the electoral majority was to tax the public 
interests, by restrictions on American free trade that 
would force her own labor to pay penalties to enrich a 
ruling class. 

To protect the labor of the States in acquiring wealth, 
influences beyond their limits through the contrivances 
of political organizations made up at Washington, must 
not control State elections of their representatives in the 
Federal relation. With conditions of Federal political 
organizations made up of local policies, at variance with 
the Federal principles of co-operation of all the indus- 
tries of the several States, political preferment will be a 
power to get State's representation against her own and 
the public interests — pledged to a policy against her 
own benefits of co-operation, by a vicious substitute, 
drawing her wealth to other States, not to benefit but 
enslave the labor there, for interests not in harmony 
with her ambition to have all her society well provided, 
and all the public and private wealth free from debt — 
those conditions that will best assist the emancipation 
of man from all vice. 

With these conditions of Federal party organizations, 
political preferment will be a power to get a State's rep- 
resentation pledged to a policy against her own equal 
rights. 

Pennsylvania monopolists, of her natural recources, 
having a private interest for Federal legislation, that 
will enable them to draw bounties from the public inter- 
ests, produced only by labor's toil, might be able by a 
bare majority, to secure tariff restrictions on imported 
raw materials, that are absolutely free trade necesities 
to give employment to American industry, if it is to have 



112 

profits for its labor by having a foreign market for its 
manufactures. Penalties on the use of those imported^ 
and bounties on the use of those from American natural 
resources would then tax profits away from American 
labor. New York labor would thereby be impoverished 
from need of those raw materials or their substitutes 
that are most suitable for use of her industry, without 
an adequate supply of which her citizenship must be- 
restricted in their production of wealth. Bounties to 
Pennsylvania landlord monopolies can tax, but never 
improve the value of the wealth possessed by New York 
industry. 

They will rather impoverish the industry of New York 
by abstracting its wealth to pay these bounties and 
make Pennsylvania labor only servile in producing raw 
materials. The citizenship of both States will become 
thereby servile and poor. New York industry will pos- 
sess so few profits as capital that it cannot manufacture, 
by a co-operation of labor with its own capital, the 
products of a free foreign trade. Neither can it afford 
to borrow the necessary capital, to replace that deliv-^ 
ered as bounties to monopolies, pay interest thereon, a^ 
the same time pay these bounties, and still export its 
manufactures. 

The power of New York for co-operation, to enable 
her industry to make better, more wealth for less labor, 
and thereby still have good profits with prices cheap 
enough for them to have foreign free trade, rendering 
her industry co-operative with those of all the other 
States of the federation, by furnishing them their im- 
ported necessaries of tea, coffee, rubber, hides, &c.,, 
cheaper, co-operating thereby m making the wealth oi 



113 

all American industry better by its greater purchasing 
power of foreign subsistence, can be withheld by the 
control of the Federal government, in hands of political 
parties that only favor private interests. This power for 
mutual protection by co-operation, is now supplanted 
by the policy of protecting private interest, secured by 
the venal vote as an electoral majority. This political 
insurgency is intended to be a fixture of perpetual suc- 
cession, it being established by first controlling the 
States, through distribution of the Federal spoils of 
office, to suit Federal politico -party plans, against se- 
curing a State majority for an independent State labor 
policy, to save the State's wealth to its own labor — from 
the devastation of the plunderer, armed with mandates 
from Washington. 

An early instance occurred, when Daniel Webster was 
compelled, under the lash of party whip at Washington, 
to vote for the so-called "American system " of protec- 
tion of monopolies, granting them power to tax profits 
out of American labor to benefit private interests, made 
a successful political power by the alliance of the mo- 
nopoly slave interests under Calhoun with land-grab, 
public-improvements, irredeemable paper currency of 
exchange, and a motley mess of other forms of taxing 
the free-trade rights of xlmerican wealth to thereby rob 
profits and leave American labor poor, under the guise 
of protecting products from outside competition, and 
giving the people employment with more wealth. 

It did not protect from outside competition of contract 
or serf labor, offering to work for low wages, which kept 
immigrating to America only to be employed by mo- 
nopolies that withheld r-^w materials and deprived 



114 

American labor of good wages. Tliis principle of trade 
restrictions on American labor's free nse of its own 
wealth was never intended to elevate, bnt only degrade 
it, and thereby elevate an income aristocracy at cost of 
labor's degi-adation. 

How many laborers having no sources of wealth ex- 
cept their hands directed by skilled knowledge, cravenly, 
servilely, ignorantly vote for the political establishment 
of this condition, believing it designed to give them em- 
ployment at good wages It was designed to leave them 
dependent on monopolies for employment, at only poor 
wages. To debar from all emploj^ment except such as 
monopolies only would provide at poor wages. There 
was provided no other conditions of employment. 
The free conditions the people possessed by virtue of 
the Federal relation were crushed out by this political 
monopoly establishment. 

"What made things worse was, that this condition cre- 
ated a competition of labor against itself. The produc- 
tion of wealth on account of restrictions in trade with 
penalties, alone forced two employees to run after one 
employer, to make the few products needed for the home 
market. For the same reason, capital in the same line 
of production competing to secure placing the few 
products that could be marketed at home, cut prices to 
secure trade. It did not secure any more trade because 
of the cut, but did destroy the profits of American capi- 
tal and prevented there being any profits to the labor 
co-operating to make these products. This caused the 
importation of servile labor to meet the cuts capital w^as 
forced to make. 

Another great adjunct to tariff taxation at that time 



115 

was the currency of monopolies of credit, to be used for 
money under State laws, and that other great tax on 
American wealth, the Bank of the United States' issues 
of credit. 

The same conditions prevail to-day, and are yielding 
the same fruits, only they are not yet so apparent, be- 
cause of the great production of wealth by means of 
labor-saving devices. During periodical " round ups " 
in insolvency it mil appear that American wealth be- 
longs to aliens, American labor being merely the cow- 
boys to brand the stock. 

Over and unequal taxation by tariff for revenue, only 
out ot the profits of labor, instead of the profits of cap- 
ital, for the incidental object of protecting landlord mo- 
nopolies in their power of robbing American labor for 
private interests only, has been the first and only cause 
of American poverty-stricken labor, financial convul- 
sions, panics and general insolvency. It has been the 
generator of credit for currency that supplanted the 
legal unit of measure of values. The popular error in- 
stilled by monopoly demagogues into the minds of 
American labor has been that free trade by low tariffs 
was the great and only cause. No doubt free trade 
under Cobden Club principles would have produced 
much the same results of poverty of labor as the present 
political policy. 

The difference between high and low tariffs, they 
nearly always being too much in favor of protecting 
American landlord monopolies, has been that there was 
more foreign commerce by American industry under low 
tariffs and an early surplus of raw materials that mo- 
nopolies could not then control, that brought national 



116 

wealth to America, when American profits were great 
and living cheap. It was a policy that cemented the 
federation, which was to have great wealth attend Amer- 
ican labor, and cheap living make only a small charge 
on that wealth, so that accumulations might increase. 
The present policy of high tariffs is small wealth for 
labor and high cost of living. 

These facts also refute statements about excessive im- 
portations of manufactures — following the periods re- 
cording American industrial insolvency, even to paralysis, 
that these events occurred because of low tariffs, which 
closed American manufactures. Even nominally low 
tariffs have always been too much protective of monop- 
olies of natural resources, and these have closed manu- 
factories, but not so much as high tariffs. 

There was in fact too much tariff and other restrictions 
on the free trade in American wealth, including manu- 
factures, that destroyed their production, because the 
condition yielded all the profits to monopoly or specu- 
lation, leaving the poorest kind of profits to American 
producers — so poor they could not live on them, hence 
restrictions were removed to revive industry. Manufac- 
turing was suspended by poverty of American wealth 
from high tariffs. 

Following these periods of business stagnation under 
high tariffs, by which American manufactories were 
elosed, importations of manufactures only occurred, be- 
cause impoverished industry could buy them on time, 
until manufactures and all other industries would revive 
under low tariffs, with temporary, voluntary, yielding 
claim for bounties, which revivals have been, however, 
hindered by bad paper currency. These excessive im- 



117 

portations have been under the delusion that an era of 
Cobden Club free trade principles had begun in Amer- 
ica. The American mind has never accepted this as a 
logic of facts, to be deducted from its purposes of free 
trade, which was of quite a different nature. 

Webster admitted in fact, although voting with a 
party Avhose principles ignored State rights, that its 
policy would destroy New England's free trade, and with 
it her foreign commerce. Since it was, however, to be a 
policy of Federal partisanship, he would claim for New 
England all the taxing power he could for her share, in 
lieu of the restrictions on her foreign commerce. 

Webster virtually admitted that he would go with the 
crowd in their " mad dissipation," even if every man 
voted to make a monopoly of the products of his own 
plantation, farm and mine, each voting for the other 
landlord's privilege of securing bounties by monopolies 
out of American labor, to get in return his vote, to serve 
him the same purpose, well knowing that this would 
destroy all manufactures, except for home use. 

Labor would be thereby thrown out of employment — 
except to produce an abnormal surplus of raw materials 
to go abroad to pay for foreign necessary exchanges, 
because there could be no manufactures of them to ex- 
port. The wealth of American labor in form of cities 
and public improvements was to be sacrificed by being- 
bonded to perpetual debt of interest to support income 
ruling classes, and thereby their owners, having no 
wealth at their command after these charges of interest 
were paid, became poor patrons of farms, mines and 
railroads, but built up a rude magnificence of a landlord 
aristocracy and a grosser, craven commercial monopoly. 



118 

like the present condition of the society of Great Britain. 

Webster would go so far as to keep that political or- 
ganization of local political monopolies in power, that 
could so sacrifice the wealth of New England. 

He had Presidential hopes in that party. From this 
cause, the Federal check on the free-trade, foreign- 
commerce liberties of New England have imposed un- 
told wrongs on her labor ever since. They have caused 
a constrained relation to the Federal union — hampering 
the spirit of her people — breeding extraordinary charac- 
teristics for self-preservation — checking the full power 
of her mighty Christian educational development — forc- 
ing an abnormal emigration West — an involuntary ex- 
patriation — leaving her hills and valleys to be vacated, 
or else peopled by a too rapid immigration from coun- 
tries that had not educated their people up to the use 
of liberty that Christian, original New England would 
have made, if untrammeled in the Federal rights of her 
wealth to fi^ee trade for her natural development. 

The industrial revolution following the estabhshment 
of the Henry Clay system of industry coiild not survive 
the freer trade of the world in competition. Industry 
grew poorer in profits, consuming all and then getting 
into debt for living, with no change in the laws. 

It is the same now. It leaves a very few rich, but the 
great mass of labor in this country — which flows with 
milk and honey out of its natural resources of wealth, 
rich in natural, geographical monopolies — struggling 
against avarice, oppression and poverty, operating with 
vice to assist degi-adation running riot with idleness. 

During the Henry Clay system of protection in the 
history of this government, the value of monopolies have 



119 

gone up, and wealth — measured by the gold standard of 
money — has gone down to nothing. The credit cur- 
rency to exchange them, was worth nothing. Industry 
had no money with which to absorb this wealth, although 
so far below natural value and cost of reproduction. 
There came always periodical ends of this much- 
vaunted, spread-eagle-oratory system. The reasons are 
poorly understood to-day. Monopoly still controls at 
Washington too much to permit of the people being well 
informed on all the facts. 

Another instance of political party's imperial inter- 
ference by monopoly at Washington with a State's policy 
occurred during President Garfield's term. It has al- 
ways been a part of the common, unwritten law of the 
Federal government that the influence of its co-ordinate 
branches are made to be a check on one another, in 
their ambition for political preferment, in order to pre- 
vent undue influence over the State's representatives at 
Washington, such as might militate against preserving 
the sources of power in the States, rather than have them 
transferred to Washington. 

The Senators of New York were not consulted in 
making the Federal appointments, according to the rules 
of courtesy established in the spirit of the unwritten law 
inaugurated by President Washington. Senators Conk- 
ling and Piatt resigned their trust to the State, with their 
seats in the United States Senate, rather than be parties 
to the breaking down of the safeguards against political 
party control from Washington, of organizations in this 
State, instead of her own people ruling it, for the pre- 
servation of her own rights, and those of every other 
State in the Federal relation — her own home rule — her 



120 

autonomy as a sovereign State, having well-defined 
rights which the Federal administration was bonnd to 
recognize ; the necessary safeguard against merging the 
responsibility of the Federal relation into an irresponsi- 
ble, alien, imperial-power rule emanating from Wash- 
ington. 

We have an example in Webster's time of the benefits 
of even a partial protection of American wealth in Amer- 
ican industry's own right by extending its market to 
where there was a natural demand for American pro- 
ducts. It secured a free trade for them abroad. This 
was accomplished by having less bounties on necessities 
for employment, and by a fiscal policy of using legal- 
tender currency for government's business, thereby 
bringing it into more general use by the people. It was 
a time of great complaint, issuing from Washington, be- 
cause speculation suffered, but there was great satisfac- 
tion expressed by American industry. 

If industry had suffered, the complaint would have 
been from the country. Any complaint that did come 
from the country was the injury industry suffered from 
previous causes, which were very much misrepresented 
in that day, to get legislation favoring private at expense 
of public interests. 

Industry flourished as never before in America. Ex- 
ports at that time were manufactures in a greater ratio. 
This was by an American foreign free trade, also an 
American foreign commerce between neutral nations, 
whose industries were too degraded through taxation of 
the profits of labor by ruling classes to have any foreign 
commerce. Foreign merchants did not supercede Amer- 
ican free trade in making American foreign exchanges. 



121 

American manufactures co-operated witli American 
ships, and with American labor, by employing them to 
make their foreign exchanges, which could then com- 
pete with the world. The trade was engineered by ag- 
gressive American free traders, in rakish American craft, 
scudding ahead of all commerce, maintaining their sail- 
ors' rights — making theirs the most popular commerce 
of the globe. They feared nothing human. They were 
iree men and therefore free traders. They had a man 
at the head of State who backed them up with all the 
protection he could afford, although he was baffled by 
monopoly schemes and combinations that are historical. 
Foreign traders could not compete, because there was a 
demand for American free labor products that were fast 
making American free traders the world's exchangers. 
The tubs of servile industry whose intelligence was sup- 
pressed, were left behind. 

This American foreign commerce by American labor 
— not monopoly— was getting it rich and independent of 
paying interest for gain of European monopoly capital. 
It did not need to do a credit business. This foreign 
free trade paid up private and public foreign debts and 
had credit to sell. It had good American manufactu.res 
for exchanges, and American industry received a larger 
share of profits, although at no time since the settlement 
of America has labor secured all the profits that are its 
due, by virtue of the Federal relation. European tradi- 
tions of land tenure have prevailed too much. 

Monopoly grumbled and demanded Federal protec- 
tion, because its schemes of speculation lagged during 
these times. It did not rob the people of enough of 
their profits to suit private interests. 



122 

It finally got the tariff changed so that the land- 
lord interests, including the Southern slave oligarchy^ 
could appropriate more of the profits of American in- 
dustry to be the capital of these landlords, while labor 
had nothing, because the government appropriated all 
its profits or savings to this monopoly interest. 

This monopoly protection resulted that the profits of 
American industry became so poor that there were none 
left, and it got into debt for bounties and penalties of 
interest for use of credit with which to make its ex- 
chanijes. It was compelled to stop producing manufac- 
tures except for the home demand, but not even enough 
for home use. It was the same as to-day. Take any 
class of manufactures. They are taxed out of making 
enough for home use. After paying tariff-restriction 
bounties with the one hand to landlord monopolies, and 
penalties for use of credit with the other, and tariff pen- 
alties on subsistence with both, their expenses leave 
them only poor profits. It is the same with the manu- 
facture of ships. It is subject to the same charges 
for private interests. 

It is impossible for ships to earn profits. They have 
to fight private competition of one another in their lim- 
ited home market. 

The sweat of the brow of American labor alone pro- 
vides all these fraudulent, imperial establishments of 
ruling classes their only support. American labor walks 
between the scourging whips of its tax gatherers, be- 
sides being forced onto one in the front, whose every 
blow draws blood from its arteries, until it falls down 
periodically exhausted. Those of the rising generation 
born to this condition as second nature, take up the load. 



123 

So the world of toil moves along, drawing its lumbering 
coacli loaded doAvn with monopolies. 

If American labor is to have any wealth, it is by toil 
and denial of the use of even necessities that would save 
it from degradation. Physical, intellectual and religious 
nourishment are absolutely denied American labor, in 
its present political conditions of servility. There is no- 
element of political freedom or profit in American labor. 
Every American who dares, tries speculation and cringes 
from labor with its poor rewards, as the only conditions 
the law permits. 

Take American shoes for an example. American labor 
gets the same poor profits in making any other products. 
What can be done with shoes ? They are restricted 
fi'om having any but a home market, and are therefore 
forced to be at war with each other. Capital is against 
capital of shoes, fighting for profits that are the political 
right of American capital without fighting for them. 
Each oppressing the other in helping itself. The impe- 
rial power — supplanting co-operative American institu- 
tions — of the government over all the products that enter 
into the cost of their production, is a whip of torture to 
compel them to pay bounties. These shoes must not 
dare to find a market for themselves abroad. The gov- 
ernment gives them no favors at home, but only robs 
them in penalties. With the wand of the law, poor, 
servile, degraded American labor, with the shoe in its 
hand it has made to provide bread for its family, sneak- 
ing out to sea to sell it, is intercepted by custom ofiicers 
to tax the subsistence he brought back for his family, 
together with a supply of raw materials to make more. 

The present tariff for revenue loads American labor 



124 

with burdens, and uses the fear of them as a cudgel to 
teep it at home, where it can be compelled to drop its 
profits into the hands of monopolies. The monopoly 
interests at Washington deny the appeals of the States, 
that their industries be relieved from the oppressions of 
the Federal government, causing their labor to toil so 
hard and have so little for it. 

The Federal government is in the hands of its enemies, 
and therefore cannot exercise the protecting power it 
was created to enforce. It declares that shoes produced 
by servile foreign labor shall have the free trade of all 
the foreign markets among neutral nations. It forbids 
American labor its political rights to sell the products 
of its labor, its shoes in the foreign markets, unless it 
will be satisfied with poor rewards of itself. It must 
forfeit its liberties. Developed, educated, skilled-labor 
American shoes, must pay the Federal tariff penalties, 
and then bounties to American monopolies, these being- 
considered by the enemies of American institutions — 
the party in power — as favorites or objects of more con- 
sideration than the protection of American labor in the 
rights due its products, that the profits be inseparable 
irom them. 

The government denies the political privilege of the 
labor producing shoes of helping to increase its fellow 
laborer's products, by paying for foreign exchange in 
such a way as to have imported necessities of tea, coffee, 
&c., cheaper, and thereby have a free trade foreign mar- 
ket for shoes, securing them in being better products, 
jet by their co-operation helping to make all other 
American wealth more valuable, such as wheat, cotton, 
;silver, manufactures, railroads, cities, harbors, &c., be- 



125 

cause the profits of tlieir use will buy more — by free trade 
in shoes — of foreign exchanges. 

The policy of the party in power, in denying this right 
of one industry co-operating to help elevate all others^ 
as being the object of the Federal relation, is laughed 
at by monopolies. When American industry asks pa- 
ternal bread, it is given a stone. For daring to ask its 
rights, only heavier burdens are laid on it. It is denied 
right to conquer its own foreign free trade, and support its 
own family relation in freedom, but must have nothing, 
in order that the expenses of the toggery of an idle class 
shall be provided by its wages. The basis on which 
this class is built, is landlord monopoly. The govern- 
ment says, these shoes may be a monopoly against for- 
eign shoes at home on only one condition. This is, that 
American laborers making shoes, to recoup the damages 
done through the government's power, must rob Ameri- 
can consumers by overcharges, if they expect themselves 
to ever have any good, paying profits. They must have 
no foreign free trade. They must stay at home, because 
monopolies of the sources of the wealth of American 
labor are the government agencies to rule over them. 
American monopolies cannot exact penalties at every 
turn, if these American shoes should escape the limits 
of monopoly jurisdiction, by having a foreign free trade 
of their own. 

The American laborer has no free trade, because he 
is denied those political rights that are his necessities if 
he is to have the foreign market. Therefore the Ameri- 
can consumer is not protected. He is not considered 
as having any rights of representation in American pol- 
itics. American institutions made for his protection are 



126 

set at naught. Monopolies claim the right to prescribe 
the terms on which he shall live under American insti- 
tutions. He must expatriate himself to get protection. 

The part of the conspiracy confining their exchanges 
to the home market is, that they can be plucked of their 
profits for private uses. Hence they are not permitted 
to leave home and bring foreign wealth back. If foreign 
shoes come in, the government would appropriate prof- 
its of consumers also, so all must be made at home that 
is possible, not to protect American labor, but because 
producers will thereby pay more of the profits of their 
labor into monopolies hands and less to the government, 
the government customs being held up as a warning in 
order that monopolies may get more out of the profits 
of American labor. Cobden may peak in with just 
enough shoes to scare American operatives, no more. 

The party in power is merciless. It says American 
labor may sink or swim, but must pay its load of tax- 
ation any way. This is the way it protects those who 
makes shoes. 

This does not profit the manufacturer of American 
shoes, because no matter how cheap he buys those sur- 
plus raw materials, that are not monopolized like wheat, 
cheese, &c., he is obliged to pay enough more for his 
other raw materials that are monopolies, so that he can- 
not possibly have good profits to himself, since supply 
is greater than demand. He will simply put down the 
price of shoes to that extent, getting for himself only 
poor profits, after paying poor wages to the producer of 
surplus raw materials, and the balance of his profits for 
bounties. 

There is another factor liable to intervene, that will 



127 

redound still more against the American manufacturing 
producer and consumer. A monopoly of credit currency 
exists, made plenty or scarce to suit private interests, 
that varies the measure of values of all products of 
American labor, in the interest of monopoly against in- 
dustry, so that the law of supply and demand is set at 
naught. This currency of credit is used to buy up 
American necessities at below value, to settle the debts 
of American labor producing them, and then be held up 
in prices to American consumers high enough to get the 
profits of their labor also. 'No wonder income people 
are forced to live abroad. The law gives them no 
other course, where they are rich enough to protect 
themselves. 

Although in President Jackson's time, American man- 
ufactures were made for a demand beyond home needs, 
yet they did not depreciate in value on this account, be- 
cause there was a good market for them abroad They 
not only improved their value by free foreign trade, but 
redounded and improved home wages. Other nations 
w^ere willing to pay American industry necessary pro- 
ducts for the surplus mnnufactures it produced, in com- 
petition with cheap-labor European manufactures and 
even Chinese manufactures. 

There was then some other cause besides the wages 
of operatives, that made American manufactures under- 
sell European, and still paid American manufacturers 
good profits after higher wages were paid to operatives. 
They must have had less other charges than European 
manufacturers, to come out of them without equivalent. 
It was solely because of too many raw materials to make 
a monopoly of them. The conditions made the demand. 



128 

The policy of President Jackson, in harmony with the 
Federal relation, was fettered, howeA^er, in those days,, 
by the monopoly power of slavery, which was a sectional, 
territorial, imperial, monopoly power, sufficient to defeat 
complete emancipation of any electoral-majority, politi- 
cal-party combination, from its baneful influence. This 
arrogant monopoly always demanded over and unequal 
taxation of other American products, to protect its own 
landlord oligarchy of natural resources in being monop- 
olies, as the condition of its electoral-majority party 
alliance, under the plea of protecting the rights of the 
States — in fact taxing those rights. No political party 
combination of sectional interests could exist as an 
electoral majority in that day, that did not concede this 
trespass on the Federal protection of wealth — the rights 
due the States thereunder — to the slave-power monopoly 
of the national sources of wealth in the Southern States. 
Henry Clay conceded it, to carry out his other plans, 
part of which was to sustain the monopoly of the Bank 
of the United States. One part of Henry Clay's scheme 
was meritorious, that of endeavoring to build up Ameri- 
can variety of employment by developing manufactures ; 
but this failed, because alliance was made with its worst 
enemies, which taxed American manufacturers into in- 
solvency. All that remained as the sum of the balance 
of the work of Henry Clay's system was taxation of the 
profits of American industry into the hands of monopo- 
lies. 

Jackson advocated cheap lands as sources for cheap 
raw materials. His war for sound legal tender money 
was so that the people would not be swindled by costly 
credit for currency. However concessions to the slave. 



129 

interest and to other monopoly-of-natural-resonrce in- 
terests would have defeated American foreign free trade 
in Jackson's time ; only that manufacturing and mara- 
time nations of Europe were then taxing their industry's 
raw materials for revenue only, by tariff restrictions. 

President Jackson's policy was to save the people 
from paying interest for a poor monopolized, debased 
credit in form of bank notes not worth their price in 
legal tender ; to recognize coin of the realm for the cur- 
rency ot the government and unit of measure of the 
value of the other products, there being no other legal 
tender currency in vogue, unless a few treasury notes 
might be considered such, the country not then needing 
a currency of greenbacks, because of being able to retire 
them by means of profitable foreign exchange under a 
regime of American foreign free trade and sailors' rights. 
States, as a vicious practice, permitted the circulation 
of irredeemable currency only to foster speculative 
schemes for taxing their own labor. 

Public prosperity was sustained even under these 
great difficulties, but speculation languished. There 
was plenty of money, because foreign exchanges were 
in favor of profits for American products, which paid 
well relatively, although to an extent over and unequally 
taxed. They were less so, however, than foreign manu- 
factures that competed with them in foreign free trade 
with neutral nations. 

This Jacksonian era — although American wages to 
opera.tives were relatively as high, if not higher than to- 
da}^, as compared with those of Europe — was the one of 
American commercial supremacy on the high seas — of 
American free trade and sailors' lights. Ships were not 
9 



130 

kept afloat without natural, untaxed-in-cost-of-produc- 
tion manufactures for freight. Foreign free trade wasi 
maintained without taxation for subsidies. Ships were 
employed b j comparatively free from bounties products. 

The monopoly in power is now doing its best to return 
the compliment to Europe, by protecting European for- 
eign trade, in the way Europe in Jackson's time protect- 
ed that of America, for the same reasons — to build up a 
home aristocracy. It is intended that aristocracy shall 
rule industry. It shall own the farms, mines, railroads, 
city and dock properties, and every form of improve- 
ment whereby it can limit production, make products 
scarce, and get more than they are worth by this form 
of taxed trade out of American consumers. It encour- 
ages immigration only to deprive it of homes and self- 
employment, and make a market for bounty-priced raw 
materials. 

President Jackson's policy of cheap homesteads on 
the public lands, neutralized this for the time. Now 
that American natural resources have been nearly ab- 
sorbed nothing short of free trade in raw materials will 
protect the wealth of those who must acquire them to 
secure the profits of production for themselves as their 
own co-operative capital, and thereby prevent monopo- 
lies owning them. 

Since then, Europe has taken lessons from the Ameri- 
can revolutionary spirit of free trade and sailor's rights. 
It shall not be technically said, by the todies of monop- 
olies, that sailors' rights were confined to mere protec- 
tion from "impressment" as the only historical meaning 
of the term, and has nothing to do with American pro- 
tection. It was the rights of American wealth of her 



131 

commercial marine, that of the export of manufactures, to 
be under a Federal policy of protection, and States' rights- 
That there be no protection of an American landlord 
aristocracy. 

Europe is detaxing her manufactures in cost of pro- 
duction, and taxing in greater proportion luxuries of 
dissipation and rent charges or incomes, cutting down 
imperial powers for extortion, measures necessary to per- 
petuate her free trade among neutral nations. 

THE NEGRO. 

Is there any one so credulous as to suppose, that mo- 
nopoly control of the party in power, or of any other 
elements of partisanship yet to come into power, means 
in the very least to protect the negro in his politico-in- 
dustrial rights to the profits of the wealth he produces 
— that of retaining them to himself — wherewith to ob- 
tain his rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happi- 
ness — protect him thereby in a Eepublican form of gov- 
ernment — by any modification of the present tariff re- 
strictions on the cost of production of his wealth ; only 
rather to add heavier political restrictions thereto ? 

The negro certainly gets not the least part of the free 
trade for his wealth of cotton, to which the rights of his 
citizenship entitle him, and therefore he gets no good 
profitable products in exchange, because the present 
tariff restrictions put arbitrary penalties on them, which 
are charged in enhanced prices. He gets nothing 
cheaper by the exchange of his cotton, to thereby im- 
prove the value of his profits or capital for his own good. 
He pays more of the cotton that he produces, for all 
products that enter into its cost of production. There 



132 

are none he consumes as an American laborer on which 
there are not bounty charges added, before he can con- 
vert them into his cotton, tobacco, hemp, sugar, &c., 
solely because the present Federal revenue law of tariff 
restrictions demands that it shall be so, to serve the pri- 
vate interest of those who maintain the present party in 
power as their agents, employed under contract to ex- 
tort profits out of all the products American labor pro- 
duces, in the nature of penalties, including the negro's, 
for these private interests ; besides those produced by 
this labor to provide the extravagant expenses of the 
government. The negro, although among the poorest 
paid of any class of American labor, is one of the largest 
contributors of this kind. These extortionate, unlawful, 
unnecessary-for-the-public-good charges, by means of a 
political wrong to his citizenship, depreciate the value 
of cotton to the negro. Federal bounty charges make 
the cost of his toil to produce his wealth so much, that 
they destroy his home market for his cotton. It cannot 
be bought at its cost-price, established through the 
power of the Federal relation, by the American manu- 
facturer of cotton cloth, except as his monopoly of the 
home market enables him to charge this enhanced price 
on his American consumers. 

The wealth of cotton, wheat, wool, &c., should have a 
natural home market, to be on a par with natural and 
constitutional value of ships, manufactures, railroads, 
cities, harbors, &c., all of which would have more value 
than they now have, were they not debarred their natu- 
ral monopoly home market by the penalties the party in 
power forces them to pay. With the political conditions 
prevailing — of a natural, co-operative home market — all 



133 

American wealth would have a higher value than it has 
under present party pohcy rule, in that profits would go 
to American labor — the negro included— instead of to an 
alien to the realm monopoly power. 

It is the cardinal policy of monopolies, which now 
rules the Federal relation over the States from Wash- 
ington, that the negro vote must not be free. It must be 
subject to the political control of Federal power by cre- 
ating irresponsibility to the States, to perpetuate the 
present anti-Federal imperial party rule, in order to 
establish a permanent ruling class of American aristo- 
cracy over the negro, as well as the white industrial citi- 
zenship. The negro must have no rights he is entitled 
to as a citizen of a sovereign State. 

The great consummation of this power is to be, that 
of taxing more securely from responsibility to the peo- 
ple and the States. It is intended that monopoly shall 
secure control of the methods of elections used by the 
States for election of their Federal representatives, and 
manipulate them, so that the people shall not have a 
free vote, but be subject to restraint — not protection — 
of the Federal power, it to prescribe voting qualifica- 
tions. The part}^ in power, by being false to its trust 
for preserving the Federal rights of the States, intends 
that all the profits of American labor shall be owned and 
put under control of monopolies for the sole purpose of 
making a labor class, subject to political disabilities. It 
shall be a poor, servile class, dependent on monopolies 
as a ruling class for its bare existence. 

The negro is under this ban. It will not be permitted 
to a single negro to be a monopolist. The class which 
is to be made into a permanent political monopoly will 



134 

be composed of a mixed society of only white Americans 
and Europeans. None will be admitted to its councils 
except possessed of unbounded wealth, and capable of 
commanding an army of servile retainers. 

Already the party in power denies the use of Arieri- 
can natural resources to American labor, unless it will 
support this monopoly power, and build it up into im- 
perial magnificence. It builds a wall against any foreign 
free trade market for American wealth, thus corralling 
so monopolies can absorb it, includ^'ng the negros' wealth 
of cotton at below the value to which it is lawfully en- 
titled. It denies the necessary provision of the home 
market as the only means for securing profits, capital or 
wealth to American industry of the negro stamp. It 
then imports servile, to supplant American labor and 
profits, for foreign styles of bare subsistence without 
profits, gradually leveling American, to have no more 
value than Chinese labor. 

The pretext that the South, or any other section of 
the country, needs bridling, is false. It only needs Fed- 
eral protection of its own free trade — its State rights by 
possessing a market for its wealth that will not exact 
penalties to support monopolies that have no co-opera- 
tive interests with American labor, to bring appeasment 
of industrial hunger, co-operation, harmony, without the 
competition that only wears it out, with no profits in 
trade. It wants free trade for its own wealth to secure 
itself freedom from debt, peace and plenty, with a happy 
social status. 

No State can afford to submit to any power or con- 
spiracy concocted at Washington against the liberties of 
American citizenship of any other State, such as is now 



135 

being entertainecl by the party in power, to permit it to 
rule any part of its labor — not even the negro. 

This bridling the South, under the blind of protecting 
the negro's vote, means to control it for subjugation of 
the North — of Northern labor — of all the wealth it pro- 
duces, to yield up its first fruits in form of profits as a 
sin or penalty offering on the altar of monopoly for a 
propitiation to secure permission to earn the means of a 
servile anti-humau existence. 

The political power of monopolies is intended to be a 
perpetually imperial condition or establishment, its cen- 
ter for emitting its mandates to be Washington, made in 
this way irresponsible to the Federal constitution and 
the people represented by States. 

There might be ins and outs of parties, growing out 
of sectional agitation and divisions, such as the inter- 
State commerce law^, silver coinage act, greenback agi- 
tation, prohibition, labor laws, and other divergent, 
instead of co-operatiA^e, political remedies, that ar^ not 
intended to cure the evils of monopoly itself, which must 
be digged out by the roots. This political Indian — the 
party in power — is no good except as a dead Indian, 
These diversionary remedies will be enough to keep the 
country's industrial and credit status in a constant state 
of turmoil. All this is schemed with monopoly political 
craft by subtle legislation, to breed a feeling of distrust, 
conservatism, and fear of change, to thus have this con- 
glomerate of divergent interests, composing an electoral 
majority, always by its disagreements, defeat common 
and public interests, and thereby fail to remove the last 
vestige of paganism — monopoly — by its inaction for its 
overthrow. 



136 

The present age can look with expanded vision at the 
historical facts presented in the record of the past, 
brought down to the present time, regarding the negro's 
indnstrial^status, before and since the war of the rebel- 
lion, and draw political conclusions, for action in har- 
mony with American institutions. 

Before the great monopoly rebellion of slavery — 
against the permanence of the liberties entrusted to the 
Federal relation — in its rule or ruin policy, the magni- 
tude of whose operations, terrors and issues dwarfs all 
previous wars by comparison — the legal status of the 
negro was, that he was only capital or property, beyond 
control of the Federal relation, to mitigate that condi- 
tion in behalf of human rights. The Federal relation 
protected slavery as a sovereign-state civil law estab- 
lishment. The negro's political status was only a bond 
of slavery. He was the subject or property bonded. 
The State and owner — of the bond giving power over 
this form of property — were the contracting parties. 
He was only wealth or property under State laws, which 
political condition the federation recognized and main- 
tained as a part of the Federal contract. 

The negro was, however, a ward of the State as a hu- 
man being. He was held mostly as plant or improve- 
ments, like cattle, implements, &c. He was a passive 
entailment, which jielded the tenure of land profits for 
rents, taken out of the wealth he produced of cotton, 
sugar, hemp, tobacco, <fec. He retained very little of it 
for subsistence. 

This was his legal status, himself being only wealth, 
so recognized and appropriated for private or monopoly 
uses by the State. He was the property of monopoly- 



137 

protected holders, required by the State to yield up the 
profits of his labor for their income. He supported an 
income aristocracy or oligarchy. This property, or he, 
had no civil law rights independent of this political con- 
dition. It was made the right of the owner of this form 
of property, whether held for farming, mining, harbors, 
public improvements, merchandise or any other use, to 
tax it — the negro — for bounties to be taken out of all the 
wealth of cotton, &c., he produced — returning no more 
of subsistence than enough to keep him in repairs, to fit 
for reproduction. 

The State laws compelled this, yet actually making 
the condition of the negro, as its ward, better than his 
present political status, which the party in power has 
provided for him. There is now no remedy — he being 
too degraded to be capable of using his political liber- 
ties to procure a mitigation from the most unlimited 
taxation of his wealth. By Federal law, he must only 
submit. If his wages are all appropriated as penalties, 
he has no claim, as under original State laws, for pro- 
vision against sickness, old age, &c. 

If he is taxed out of his wealth of cotton to pay pen- 
alties on his cost of production, and left on the highways 
or public lands, by Federal laws, that only obliterate his 
sovereign right of protection due as a citizen of the 
State ; the law strictly maintains this condition. More 
than this. It interposes, with its electoral majority se- 
<3ured by venal vote, to prevent any efibrt being made to 
better this political status of his industrial condition — 
that of being robbed of his wages to support an Ameri- 
can aristocracy of monopoly — one of helpless, hopeless, 
pitiable degradation, ignorance and want. 



138 

The educated classes must submit to the demands of 
avarice or monopoly, because labor does not unite to 
secure itself freedom and support, so none of them are 
sent to instruct him as to his constitutional rights of 
American citizenship — to. the full, natural rewards, prof- 
its, or real value due him, of the wealth he produces, as 
an equal citizen of the federation of these United States 
— a citizen in equality of right as to his wealth, that the 
liberties under the Federal constitution entitle him to.. 
No political savior is preached to him, to be embraced 
as his anchor and salvation. His condition of bondage 
to a debt of perpetual bounty taxation is made abso- 
lutely necessary, to keep the present monopoly-sup- 
ported political party in power. I 

The negro may perish for all the provision the Federal 
laws have made for his protection in lieu of the poor 
one of his State bondage. This will not preserve, but 
only leave him to degradation, that others may possess 
his wealth. The confiscation is made solely by means 
of penalties on his necessities — if he is to make any 
Avealth of cotton — to keep a false-to-its-trust political 
party in imperial power at Washington, officially, how- 
ever, holding the insignia of Federal, co-operative-pro- 
tection power, for the security of the equal rights of 
American citizenship only, the negro's as much as any. 

If the negro is elevated to, and protected on, the level 
and equality of right his political status entitles him, it 
must be by means resulting in the total extinguishment 
of the power of monopoly taxation, or bounty charges 
of any kind for use of American natural monopolies and 
improvements thereon. These only absorb his profits 
and restrict him from having free-trade wealth which he 



t 



139 

can call his own — free from perpetual debt of usury. 
The political party in power is pledged by every act and 
declaration of party platform that the negro shall, with- 
out recourse, suffer over and unequal taxation ; that this 
shall be made to cause a depreciation of the lawful 
value pertaining by virtue of the constitution to his 
wages or earnings of cotton and other products. 

This will leave him a net only of what must cause him 
to be a neglected, servile wretch, a degraded human 
being, for want of natural provision to make him other- 
wise, after he has done his religious duty in producing 
enough for his well being and to sustain the family re- 
lation that Creative powder provided for him the means 
to do, but which are wdthlield by force by the party in^ 
power, in violation of Creative law. All that he pos- 
sesses is taken from him to support idle, income monop- 
olies, and enables them to spend their time and profits 
abroad. 

Calhoun saw through the plan of taxation levied on 
the production of American wealth only, by the Henry 
Clay system of tariff restrictions. It was so constructed 
that it w^ould mostly tax profits out of the wealth North- 
ern labor must produce to live on. He did not object 
to the spread-eagle oratory of that day, lauding it as the 
great system of American protection, &c., to give the 
people employment. 

It Avas simply taxation by landlord monopoly for all 
that. He agreed to the cry, protect American manu- 
factures, securing bounties if possible to those wanting 
to make such manufactures as were imported from Eu- 
rope, bounties enough to recoup for all landlord monop- 
oly charges. Charge up for all raw materials, then^ 



140 

invite clieap labor from Europe to rob it of its wages in 
buying American products by means of monopolized 
liigh prices, making it cost more to live in America than 
where people could escape this bounty taxation, causing 
landlord aristocracies to draw income from the profits 
of American labor, and spend it patronizing the products 
of foreign labor, beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal 
power to collect any custom duties. 

Hemp, tobacco and sugar were among the principal 
staples to be protected in their power of taxing politi- 
cally free labor, as distinguished from slave labor, in 
monopoly prices, thereby absorbing its profits or capi- 
tal, as the condition of its having anything to live on, 
and be poor ; also to be shut out of its foreign free trade, 
by helping to make the cost of living high at the North 
for the benefit of the landlord oligarchies of the Souths 
giving Northern landlord monopolies a share. The 
wealth of ships was to cost too much labor to produce 
and do any foreign commerce with. The profits of for- 
eign commerce were to be lost to American wealth, and 
were to be earned by a servile foreign labor for benefit 
of foreign monopolies, mostly Cobden Club free-trade 
commerce. Daniel Webster, representing Massachu- 
setts, agreed to this. Northern labor was thereby to be 
in the political condition of mudsills. 

What if Europe does America's foreign commerce ? 
thinks Calhoun in the interest of Southern monopolies, 
as they then existed in double form. We can rob our 
own industry — the slaves — of all the profits of cotton, 
&c., they produce, which profits are our capital. Let us 
in the sale of this same wealth of cotton, hemp, tobacco, 
sugar, &c., which costs us so little, to Northern hibor for 



141 

its subsistence, for prices in which we are protected by 
the power of the Federal government through its tariff 
restrictions, as monopolists, charge up enough to absorb 
all the profits of Northern labor, and make mudsills of 
it in scratching for a living — make it to be no more 
profitable than slave labor. Its politicians are venal 
enough to sell its liberties for political honors under the 
Federal government, which we of the South can w^ell 
afford to give them. We as monopolists do not care foj» 
office, but want a party that will protect our private in- 
terests. 

The party in povv^er then said, Amen. The same po- 
litical elements are the party in power to-day, the party 
of landlord aristocracy — politically the establishment of a 
monopoly power. Let American labor North and South 
be mudsills forever after, says this party now. The ab- 
olition of slavery is intended for the purpose of classing 
all American labor as mudsills to monopolies, using the 
party in power as its cat's-paw. This is only the policy of 
the X3arty in power. It claims American industry fought 
out this issue successfully, and tells Europe so, and to 
go on building ships, because American monopoly policy 
denies any ships to American labor. It may pay the 
cost of a few of monopoly, subsidized ships. 

Is this so ? Will American labor always submit to 
this control of its liberties ? 

The political party in power ridicules the sentiment 
as a sickly thing, that of American foreign commerce — 
of free trade and sailors' rights — preferring foreign free 
trade, advocating the taxation of American free trade 
out of existence for this purpose, and to build upon the 
ruins of its Federal grandeur and prosperity the 



Ii2 

degradation of American industry North and South by 
subjection to landlord and commercial monopolies. 

The political party of to-day agreed to this alliance, 
through its representatives of that day, not for the pub- 
lic interests, but to secure an electoral majority. Wash- 
ington was the fountain, as it always has been, for 
conspiracies against American labor's ri^^hts of free trade. 

Every Federal measure that this cloven-footed polit- 
ical party can foist on the attention of Congress for the 
purpose of destroying the sovereignty and autonomy of 
the States by causing American labor to possess poor 
wages, is attempted under guises of one kind or other, 
to hide its mortal stabs into the body of American citi- 
zenship. 

All protection of this system must be only for monop- 
oly's power to enforce pure penalties or bounties, paid 
to them by American labor. All American labor is po- 
litical heir to, is a form of oppressive distrainment for 
rent. The same party, by its representatives of to-day, 
does the same thing, from the same heartless, unprinci- 
pled animus. 

Webster, considering the duties on imported manu- 
factures, saw this advantage to New England as a pure 
bounty, but only up fco the time of over-production, for 
the only market then to be — the home market, making 
the activity resulting from it to have temporary popu- 
larity, entailing, however, a system of monopoly protec- 
tion that no over-production could obliterate, even if it 
could bounties for manufactures. 

He knew the system, being protective of monopoly 
only, but not of domestic manufactures, except as infant, 
dependent labor, always subject to exactions of their 



143 

profits as landlord bounties, would inevitably result in 
labor-federations, also capital combines, in deadly strug- 
gle for self -existence against each other — the cats whose 
tails were tied and slung over the clothesline by the boy 
monopoly — each fighting the other instead of this com- 
mon enemy, each in mortal combat for self-existence 
against the other. 

Under this system there could be no other than oppo- 
sition, no co-operation. All would be limited in market, 
hence limited in production. State's industries against 
each other, no rich labor of one State able to make the 
labor of another State rich by a demand for the pro- 
ducts of its labor. 

He admitted this condition was not as good for New 
England, or the country generally, as the correct rule of 
the law of the Federal relation, which this party intends 
to destroy. 

Rather than have New England out of the combina_ 
tion of conspiracies against the liberties of American 
labor made at Washington, by which her pohticians 
might lose Federal preferment and be free from State 
responsibility, all this monopoly taxation principle was 
consented to be given, more power over the wealth of 
American labor than the Federal relation permitted. 
This power was ample to appropriate the profits of this 
labor without equivalent, and deliver them to monopo- 
lies of capital, leaving it poor and dependent on the 
monopolies that so wronged it for employment — its pit- 
tance for living — on the only political conditions to exist 
as the future American institutions, that of a bare, 
servile subsistence. American labor has not lost its 
vote, to throttle the venal vote paired against it. It has 



144 

lost the liberties its vote can recover. Will it show it- 
self capable of self-goverument, recovering its political 
liberties by a free use of its free vote as a State right ? 
Will it see the venal vote cast, through subtle use of 
Federal power, to make its own have no protection of 
its liberties ? 

The sequence of these measures for monopoly absorp- 
tion of American wealth was universal insolvency of 
American industry. Because it was so poor and had 
so little credit of its own, the only credit available for 
commercial exchange was the credit of the Bank of the 
United States. It suffered fearfully at the hands of this 
institution, which expanded or contracted that credit for 
commercial exchange as a means of forcing legislation 
to grant it more monopol}' power. American labor was 
too much taxed in penalties for private interests to have 
any wealth of its own not bonded for debt, hence have 
any good credit. It became too unproductive to pro- 
duce its bare necessities by its labor in the form of 
manufactures, although there was ample protection 
against importations. It lapsed all its profits to monop- 
olies, getting into debt besides. The debts thus incurred 
cost American labor its liberties. 

Since those days and the late civil war, the negro has 
been permitted to vote, as a minority only, first, how- 
ever, robbing him of all his constitutional liberties, those 
he most of all needs, by carefully transferring the trus- 
teeship of his wealth from the control of the State to 
the Federal, political establishment of monopoly, cutting 
him out of all protection American institutions provide. 

The party of venal-vote power, domineering in the 
Northern States, has also since the late civil war been 



145 

an electoral majority, in the Federal relation, and has 
thereby been able to perpetuate the degradation of 
American negro labor. 

The more cotton he produced, the more tariff for rev- 
enue only he contributed, because needing thereb}^ more 
products made from monopolized raw materials and sub- 
sistence. The party in power has, however, persistently 
refused to permit raw materials and subsistence to be 
free from penalties on production, so as to cheapen the 
cost of American manufactures ; also that of tea, coffee, 
&c., through being obtained by direct exchange of Amer- 
ican manufactures, all being necessary to cheapen the 
cost to be taken out of the poor negro for the produc- 
tion of cotton. 

Such a free trade policy would enable the negro to 
exchange his cotton for tree-trade. Federal-protection- 
value gold and other products Avith which to buy from 
society, improvements and rights to possession of land. 
This would make a fixture of the negro's citizenship. 

He is therefore deprived of the power to own enough 
legal tender and other wealth for all his needs, after 
having produced enough to buy them. 

Would the present monopoly party of the North ever 
hear of such a thing as protecting the negro in his in- 
dustrial rights ? Certainly not. This would break the 
backbone of its political power. The negro cannot log- 
ically expect anything else but taxation and oppression 
from the present electoral majority. It will never grant 
him his Federal, political right to save wealth for him- 
self. He must produce it, only to be taxed to support 
an idle income aristccracy, leaving him always poor by 
taking his profits or capital therefor. He shares in the 
10 



146 

contribution to support American labor's taskmasters, 
the result of the present tariff on his foreign exchange. 
Majorities override his shield of Federal protection by 
appropriating his cotton, &c., at less than its value by 
virtue of the political rights of American labor. 

The American labor which produces the cotton — the 
negro — is charged by the present tariff restrictions a li- 
cense, costing pure penalties, for the right to toil. These 
are so heavy that he is compelled to lose his home mar- 
ket for his cotton — for all he has labored to produce it 
to provide for the natural Christian necessities of his 
family. He is deprived of all the natural means his cir- 
cumstances offer, as provision from Creative power for 
making wealth by producing cotton, through present 
tariff restrictions. Sometimes he is in debt, after his 
cotton is all applied on his account for the necessities of 
its production at their enhanced prices, this being the 
way he pays penalties out of his only wealth, his cotton, 
that robs him of the means to acquire anj- wealth for 
himself. The conditions are embraced, for instance, in 
the enhanced price of plows, hoes, fertilizers, pork, tea, 
sugar, tobacco, railroad freights, &c. 

He stands as to political infringement of his rights 
the same as the American wheat, wool, live stock, gold, 
silver, copper, tin and lead producers do. He is not a 
bit more protected by his pretended friends and pre- 
servers. Like them, he has all taxation and no protec- 
tion. He has simply changed taskmasters. He is no 
wiser than his fellow voter in Kansas and Iowa, who 
still votes for monopoly restrictions under the lash of 
the "grand old party" whip, with an empty pocket- 
book, except a few receipts for corn paid as interest on 



147 

debt, because of its non-payment. There is an addition 
of more notices of protest for non-payment of interest, 
glued by sweat to the lining of his pocket-book. Re- 
ceipts for any part of the principal are not there. 

No wonder then — seeing his oppression by taxation, 
that makes his necessities for production of his cotton 
cost more than it will bring — the negro is looking to 
South America, Mexico, Africa and other countries, 
where he can settle by agreement to be free from land- 
lord bounty taxation on his cotton, as the Boers of South 
Africa have done. It may be in a few years, this robbed- 
of-his-all-and-expatriated American negro will land his 
foreign free trade, untaxed -for-penalties-to-support-an- 
income-class cotton in New York, to exchange for Amer- 
ican labor's cotton cloth, hoes, plows, wagons, shoes, 
sewing machines, steel rails, locomotives, &c., offering to 
undersell the American negro's cotton, which the party 
in power makes more costly to produce, requiring more 
labor for the same amount of cotton. How much tarift'- 
restriction penalties on imported cotton will the Ameri- 
can laborers — the Southern negro cotton growers — ask, 
to be protected, so they can recoup the extra charges 
they must pay for no profit to themselves, to protect 
against the competition of this foreign free-trade cotton 
of the negroes forced to expatriate themselves because 
of American wrongs ? 

Will taxing by tariff restrictions on imported cotton 
help to give more value to the American negro's cotton, 
which increased value he must have to make anything 
like good wages for his labor, under his present obliga- 
tions to pay so many penalties out of it r Has not the 
Federal government for the protection of the wealth of 



148 

cotton to the negro relieved him from all restrictions on 
production under the laws of slavery ; only to put them 
on in an even more servile form, by an alien power, 
made higher than the protection of the constitution over 
him — the present imperial tariff restrictions ? 

Has the " American system of industry," with boun- 
ties to sectional interests in natural resources, paid by 
taxation of wealth produced only by American labor, to 
which his wages of cotton contributed all their profits, 
leaving him always poor, been abandoned because the 
institution of the monopoly of slavery is out of the ring, 
as a paternal-government-protected receiver ? Will the 
negro get enough more wealth out of his cotton, in form 
of exchange of tea, coffee, plows, &c , for cost of pro- 
duction, to offset freedom from the tax on his wages 
under the law of slavery, by a tax on imported cotton ? 
Is this the Federal protection of cotton that negro labor 
needs since it produces more than there is a free-trade 
demand for at home, made so by tariff restrictions ? 
Will any one assert that present tariff-for-revenue-out- 
of-his-cotton restrictions is not the cause ? There can 
be no free-trade demand at home — unless to make the 
surplus into manufactures for export. Because there is 
no free trade for the negro, he must export the surplus 
to find a market as raw materials, the servile-labor price 
of which abroad sets the hair on the price at home — the 
present value of the negro's cotton. 

Therefore this expatriated negro's untaxed-in-cost-of- 
production-for-penalties cotton must find a market in 
Europe. Federal tariff restrictions to levy penalties for 
revenue on American free trade, alone determine the 
value American labor shall have for its cotton. It is 



149 

not the competition abroad which make the price, how- 
ever, with the profits subtracted, therefore below the 
vakie that the American negro is entitled to, by the law 
of his citizenship — a protected home market. It is not, 
therefore, the competition of the expatriated negro's 
cotton, which becomes better wages to him, than the 
American negro's cotton is to him, simply because he 
has less imperial, cruel, unlawful charges to pay out of 
them for support of an income class, rulino- over him. 
He has relieved himself by his expatriation for loyalty 
to the heritage of liberty, of all those restrictions on his 
free trade that oppress the American negro and become 
a charge on all American labor, because it is impossible 
to tax the negro's cotton without making indirect tax- 
ation on the wealth of all other American labor, if that 
tax is only a penalty on production. 

With the Federal principles of protection enforced, 
the price of the American negro's cotton at home would 
control the price abroad. The demand abroad would 
improve the value of cotton, the enhanced prices justly 
representing the value of the natural monopolies of 
American landlordism, with no damage to the public in- 
terests, because with such conditions the income would 
be spent at home, or if abroad without lessening the 
value of capital to American labor, which would be fully 
employed at good profits, not needing any help in this 
way, having graduated from infancy of industry to inde- 
pendence. 

The negro — to be therefore politically emancipated 
and raised to the plane of American citizenship that the 
Federal constitution entitles him, must have all and the 
only protection the Federal government can give to the 



150 

value of his cotton — the protection clue to his political 
independence in its free trade, to secure for himself and 
his estate of the family bond all the profits arising from 
his labor without any charge on them for bounties, and 
without paternal government bounties taken out of the 
wealth of any other American labor, to give this cotton 
the natural value American institutions provide it sJiall 
have without wronging a co-laborer. 

He gets no relief in the foreign market. Our present 
tariff-tax system restricts him from the free trade neces- 
sary to obtain the natural value of cotton at home. It 
commands him to submit to a condition that only puts 
down its value, destroying his natural-monopoly home 
market, because he cannot supply the product of his 
labor, subject to charges of royalties to monopolies of 
natural resources, at the price necessary to be co-opera- 
tive with the American manufacturer, who is already 
overburdened by royalties of the same nature, by which 
he is therefore not able to make the factory cotton at a 
price that will cause a market demand for it, as Ameri- 
can co-operative, free-trade foreign merchandize, with 
which to exchange for tea, coffee, &c.,that his operatives 
and all his domestic exchangers consume as necessaries. 

These on this account are made luxuries, to be pro- 
vided by a foreign commerce. They are paid for by 
foreign manufactures, in part made with American cot- 
ton and other raw materials. 

The condition — of the tax-collar round the negro's 
neck, of perpetual debt of royalties to monopolies, es- 
tablisihed by his false political friends of the North — of 
a tariff tax called protective, to throw cotton, the negro's 
almost only wages, into the laps of his oppressors, 



151 

makes him a poor, worthless vagabond. He is thereby 
denied the gospel of peace and prosperity, denied all 
educational development and other occupation than that 
of selling his vote to these ruthless robbers, who stand 
ready to destroy every vestige of the Christian dispensa- 
tion of right belonging to him naturally and politically. 

The American laborer — negro included — is deprived 
by Federal power of the profits or capital he earns 
w^herewith to provide himself and family a place of wor- 
ship. There is no place provided for him by the mo- 
nopoly class that the law has empowered to carry the 
American laborer's privy purse. 

By mandate of the civil law, therefore, he is a relig- 
iously degraded outcast. He is generally punished if 
he violates any part of the civil law, although there is 
no punishment for the violation of his fundamental law 
of protection, but a premium of the profits of American 
labor appropriated as a reward for its violation. Such 
are the logical results of the policy of the party in 
power. How can State society help him, so long as the 
power of the Federal relation robs him of his wealth 
and locates it in Europe beyond the reach of contribu- 
tion for public needs ? 

The present tariff restriction system preter.ds to pro- 
tect, but actually taxes without constitutional procedure, 
the Avealth of the negro for his Federal rights of citizen- 
ship. These rights pertain to him by law, without such 
taxation. The contract of the Federal relation declares 
he shall not be obliged to pay any su.ch penalties. That 
the same restrictions tax the wealth of the manufacturer 
in the same way is no excuse for taxing penalties on the 
products of the poor negro. 



152 

Taxation in penalties on tlie manufacturer of factory 
cotton makes it to cost liiglier prices which laboi^saving 
devices neutralize apparently only, but cannot overcome. 
The manufacturer must limit production and keep oper- 
atives out of employment to force these higher prices out 
of American consumers for self-protection. He must 
wrong his co-laborers, or else monopoly will gore him. 
Therefore the American income consumer is not bene- 
fited by the wrong done American labor, but injured by 
this taxation of penalties on the cotton of the poor, toil- 
ing negro, who is doomed to eternal poverty throughout 
all his generations under these political oppressions. 
The fact of the negro not being intelligent enough to be 
self-protective is no reason why he should not be pro- 
tected in the sphere Creative power has placed him. It 
is no justification for violating Creative law. All the 
more duty to elevate by protecting him. 

In fact he has a natural monopoly in his labor thai; 
would enable him to get the best net wealth in the v>^orld 
for his cotton, if he is only protected by his real friend 
— the Federal constitution. 

He does not naturally need any protection against 
foreign cotton. He never could arbitrarily need it, any 
more than the ayooI grower, unless his cost of production 
is enhanced by bounty charges to support a monopoly 
condition, or income class, from rents so that Indian 
cotton or. that of other countries being taxed less for 
bounties to landlords — in cost of production — would be 
imported, or else injure his foreign free-trade market 
prices ; their freedom from penalties less, therefore mak- 
ing them capable of bringing better or more foreign wages 
to their producers than American cotton, with restricted 



153 

or taxed, rather than free trade, conditions to American 
labor. 

The poor, degraded, helpless freedman does need to 
be relieved from bounty cost of everything that enters 
into and becomes a part of his cotton by necessary mer- 
gence, so that he can find a free-trade and better market 
at home, because of having cotton with no bounty prices, 
rather than taxed product at bounty prices, to sell. His 
American citizenship will then make him better able to 
dictate the price of his cotton abroad, because he can 
make his price lower — still getting better net profits. 
He need not be compelled, as he now is, to permit a 
foreign, to make his domestic market price — permit an 
alien Cobden CJub monopoly to set the measure of prof- 
its he will receive for his cotton. 

The American negro is finally discouraged. He does 
not strive to acquire the wealth of cotton, preferring to 
hunt for the wealth of 'possum. It may be for the good 
reason that it is more profitable wealth to him, because 
requiring less monopoly and foreign exchanges to make 
his subsistence, the 'possum being able to work up crude 
vegetables into the wealth of meat, and not pay rent 
charges therefor, until the country is fully absorbed into 
landlord arable lands and preserves. He has debts at 
the store, all too costly, not that his merchant charges 
too much profit ; but because there is a political party 
in office which empowers monopolies to enhance prices 
on the merchant, who also suffers the same oppressions 
and is not permitted to co-operate with the negro to se- 
cure good profits for both. All this depriving the negro 
of his lawful Christian estate is the result of the policy 
of the party in power favoring private interest at cost 
of the public. 



154 

The discouraged negro therefore leaves his cotton 
standing unpicked on the ground to go to waste perhaps^ 
because he knows there is not enough of it to pay his 
debts ; and for no fault of his own, only his misfortune 
in having the present political party, that is the prime 
cause of the woe of having a monopoly power entailed 
on him to absorb all his profits in enhanced cost of liv- 
ing before they are produced, bonding their very pro- 
duction to secure his necessities. 

His degraded condition, however, makes him unable 
to bear all this strain. He is therefore called lazy and 
shiftless, because cotton in the field goes to waste, when 
in fact it is the unnatural condition of bondage to a per- 
petual debt of taxation by monopolies, maintained by 
the party he votes for, out of his cotton, so that he has 
none after all to keep himself in good condition, as an 
incentive to labor, that is the prime cause of his idle- 
ness and vice. 

He might become a good citizen, and no doubt would, 
as a race be such, preparing himself perhaps in time, to 
carry real Christianity to Africa ; and, if getting simply 
the protection du.e his citizenship as an American la- 
borer, solve the social problem of the South, he being 
thus protected in his God-given faculties for education ; 
instead of being degraded by those imperial restrictions 
made on the production of his cotton — under the guid- 
ance of a monopoly-supporting political party concocted 
at Washington, to establish a caste tO rule over him 
calling his degradation his natural condition, which is a 
libel on the Christian truth and justice of his American 
liberties and citizenship, as declared by his bill of rights 
embodied in the constitution construed by the principles 



155 . 

of the Christian religion embodying one great truth — the 
brotherhood of man. 

From the fact that the party in power has deprived 
the negro of those political rights, the need of which de- 
bases his life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, his equal- 
ity of right as an American laborer in respect to his 
wealth to stand on a legal-tender, free-trade, par value 
of exchange, as good as any other in the world — at home 
and abroad, (for there is no reason why the negro who 
earns as good wages should not have as good as the 
Federal constitution provides shall belong to any Amer- 
ican labor) tossing him the sop -of the amendments to 
the Federal constitution, in lieu of such substantial pro- 
tection — to be used only to secure majorities for his op- 
pression — he is compelled not only to stop development, 
but to actually exhaust his lands, his bodily and mental 
powers for lack of natural support, seeing his family 
neglected, unprovided, unprotected anct left- to the temp- 
tations of vice, a prey to the avarice of monopoly. 

This is a sad commentary on American philanthropy, 
having the spirit of the Federal constitution, bought 
with the blood of the revolution, and purified of its 
stains by the blood of the late civil war before its eyes. 
It closes its ears to the pitying cry, clothed in immortal 
verse of a Whittier, who would sing of the abundant 
Providence for the negro — yet withheld for the base 
purpose of political supremacy, founded on more cruel 
monopoly than his former slavery, rather than the truths 
that make for the Christian elevation of the negro's 
American citizenship. 

Will foreign manufactures be imported by American 
industry, to supplant its own — made free from bounties 



. 156 

— if the negroes, among other American citizens, have 
relief froQi that system of tariff restrictions^— that only 
enhances the cost of production of all American wealth, 
without labor getting anything of it out of the enhanced 
price in the shape of profits, to be his capital or prop- 
erty — which is made, so that labor shall pay it, oneyery- 
thing it consumes — destroying American free trade, by 
establishing a condition of non -production and non- 
consumption by American industry, from poverty alone 
of capital of its ovvii to co-operate with? 

This would not occur if American industry received, 
in exchange, as good wages as it produced. It would 
receive as good, but for political partisanship violating 
its rights. 

Foreign manufactures will actually be imported less, 
in ratio to those of home production, and American in- 
dustry will become richer through its foreign commerce 
in its own manufactures, by restoring its political rights. 

The capital of American manufacturing plant will 
make more cotton cloth at less cost, if made with cotton 
that has free-trade protection, and thus be able to give 
more cloth, tea, coffee, &c., for the negro's cotton, than can 
be done by Cobden Club manufactures paying freights. 

The emancipation of the cotton of the negro, from 
monopoly taxation, belongs to him as a political, as well 
as a Christian right, recognizing, as they both do, the 
brotherhood of man. 

Until which. Federal subsidies are of no account 
whatever to him, in any form, or for any purpose ; and 
are so intended by the cloven-footed power behind the 
throne at Washington when Federal endowments are 
offered for his schools. He will never be taught his po- 



157 

litical rights in them, if monopoly power can prevent it ; 
but his ritualism will be the clnty of his service to the 
god-monopoly, created by the party in power, for him to 
serve. His vote is required to do this service, as his 
political obligation for the mess of pottage, called 
" funds for educational purposes." 

It will pay him far better to have, as his own posses- 
sion, the wealth he produces, retaining its profits as 
his capital, and then buy his own educational establish- 
ment. It will be both cheaper and more elevating to the 
negro to be politically and industrially independent, 
using his profits to pay for his education, and not par- 
take of the surplus from a tariff for revenue to which he 
contributes, established to make a toiling laboring class, 
and making this class earn all the costs of public ex- 
penses, and support an income aristocracy also. 

Granting that Switzerland did not tax the profits of 
production, but only the income of capital, and there- 
fore her labor was free, so far as her government juris- 
diction extended to protect labor's dues. This is no 
good reason for the United States of America (herself 
first restoring freedom from all taxation on her labor) 
to have absolute free trade with Switzerland. The pro« 
ducts of Switzerland are charged penalties in the cost 
of their transportation through every country they must 
pass to reach America, because the labor of all these 
countries is yet servile, and the prices of carrying 
charges would not be only enough for that labor, but to 
provide a percentage to support their landlord and other 
monopolies, making Switzerland's wages servile, that 
were first made free. If American labor was political- 
ly free, as the American law provides, then the labor of 



158 

Switzerland, if it were powerful enough, would be j usti- 
fied in demanding of the governments whose industry 
•exchanged her products for those of America's should 
be free, to secure full freedom for her industry. It 
would justify invasion and restoration of natural free- 
dom to those would-be co-operative laborers. 

Tariff restrictions are defensible against foreign inter- 
ests of an oppressive, anti-free-trade nature. They are 
at best but reprisals against foreign monopolies. Amer- 
ican laborers, producers, manufacturers of all kinds of 
products, should have full, unalloyed tariff restrictions 
against foreign free trade" of the defensive kind only. 
Although American labor's sympathies might be with the 
locally free labor of Switzerland, yet, with present con- 
ditions, free trade could not exist without foreign monop- 
olies exacting the profits from the wages that American 
labor produces and controls, making the value of wages 
to be less to American labor, which can only invite Swiss 
free labor to emigrate to America, and wait until a nation 
in America grows strong enough to demand that Swiss 
labor in the father-land has its natural rights protected, 
of which the present governments deprive it. 

There should be protection by the American Federa- 
tion of only free trade in American products. The tran- 
sit on Swiss wealth would be paid by American con- 
sumers. 

American labor should be protected against home 
monopolies as well as against foreign. This protection 
should be sufficient to secure free trade in the foreign 
markets for American products without reciprocity 
treaties. It should enable them to be natural exchanges, 
and to do the interchanging of neutral nations having 



159 

no foreign commerce, supplanting European monopoly 
commerce in a fair competition. This is the only pro- 
tection the Federal relation can give American labor, that 
will injure no private interest. 

A national party organization that will concede poli- 
tical protection to any kind of monopoly or local inter- 
ests to secure electoral majorities, does not deserve the 
confidence of American labor. If it once gets into 
power, lugging, itself with such a compromise, it T^ill 
concede greater taxation on American labor to private 
interests, to retain this power and spoils of office — the 
same as the party in power now does. 

All American labor and resident capital should be free 
fi'om bounties, to enable them to perform their duty of 
furnishing all domestic and foreign subsistence withoiit 
getting into debt that would draw interest-money abroad^ 
to protect thereby the high estate and dignity of Amer- 
ican labor earning wealth, making its production involve 
less toil than any other citizenship is protected in, yet 
with the highest and best wages in the world to Ameri- 
can operatives who produce manufactures, and the dealer 
or manufacturer who handles them, and the American 
merchant marine -making foreign exchanges, no one being 
allowed to scalp all but poor wages out of co-operators 
to protect himself, all being co-operative, making wealth 
to each, by making it to all American labor. At present 
the dealer or manufactarer must pay bounty prices for 
coal, iron and lumber among other things, and must 
charge more for his manufactures to the American la- 
borer for liis silver, copper, lead, wheat, cotton, hops, 
butter, eggs, cheese, <fec., who in turn must get more 
than normal prices if they are to be protected in being 



160 

good wages to American labor. They are not protected 
in this way because these abnormal prices destroy their 
home market, making the foreign market as poor. The 
abundance of American natural monopolies or sources 
of wealth, in every variety, is too much to be overcome 
by the wealth of any other country, attempting by free 
trade to supplant them among neutral nations, if these 
are protected from infringement on their natural rights. 
They will furnish, with least labor, the greatest amount 
of products. 

The combination-monopoly, political party in power 
only backs water with its oars, obstructing the foreign 
free trade of the Federal convey of wealth, blocking its 
passage beyond the realm, causing it to circulate be- 
tween its own harbors, inside of headlands ; yet there is 
a flourish of trumpets as to the value of the wealth 
American labor produces. There is no word, however, 
as to how this labor is defrauded of its wealth, and of 
the debts and liens it must toil to earn interest on, nor 
how much these are piling up, how much of private 
debts, paying interest and borrowing more as population 
grows, on the credit of its ability to produce wealth. 
This wholesale borrowing is on the credit of possessing 
servile, toiling children, and on those yet unborn to toil 
and shoulder this perpetual debt, but estimated on some 
financial insurance tables of increase, this " grand old 
party" prompts Uncle Sam to pledge his domain to 
produce. 

A tariff that enhances the cost of living is in fact a 
tariff for revenue only, out of labor protecting incident- 
ally American landlord monopolies from all taxation, if 
the schedule embraces digenious raw materials. It is 



161 

nsnally called a protective tariff, if manufactures are in 
the schedule, which does not protect, but only taxes labor. 
A tariff for protection only, under American institutions 
does not enhance the cost of living on consumers, but 
secures the employment of American labor in making 
all the necessities of consumers, causing their imported 
substitutes to be dispensables or luxuries, on which if 
tariff penalties are paid, these are not forced out of la- 
bor. It relieves labor from the necessity of submitting 
to such charges, which -thereby retains wealth to it, and 
conforms to the public interest, providing no fund for 
support of an income ruling class — no class dependant 
on extortion for its subsistence. Although it secures 
employment for labor yielding it profits, yet its products 
can be sold cheaper, making living cheaper, because the 
price does not cover any charges to be paid as bounties, 
but only charges for labor. 

Under present political conditions of tariff for revenue, 
but not protection of labor, America must contribute to the 
support of European institution also, as its necessary inci- 
dent, including broods of armies, in the j)ageantry of 
which American income people delight. Is it surprising 
that the representatives of these anti- American, anti- 
Federal, anti-co-operative institutions are so popular in 
Europe, and that she condescends to accept America's 
richest dowries, by the convenient form of semi-pagan 
marriage contracts, in which American girls are the 
chattels? On account of the unnatural distribution of 
wealth to monopoly, disharmonizing conditions exist in 
European society. Money — not the Christian law of 
marriage — is forced too much to be the marriage consid- 
eration. American girls are sacrificed to that extent. 
11 



162 

Pagan civilization still debauches the European mar- 
riage relation. 

Since imperialism is supplanting the co-operative law 
of the Federal relation, European ideas of the property 
qualifications of marriage, are being established as a 
part of American society and its institutions — a cowardly, 
dependent, way of retaining wealth in families. 

How different from the tariff laws made for protection 
of labor only during President Washington's first term. 
Great Britain looked with alarm at the revolutionary 
declaration of the right of American labor to have free 
foreign trade in its own products — -to be free from all 
exactions whatever in the nature of human oppression. 
She saw that this policy aimed to enable American la- 
bor to undersell in the American market, and compete 
successfully in the world's free trade markets. The first 
tariff restrictions were aimed to protect the most profit- 
able way for buying imported tea, coffee, &c., and to in- 
terchange in all the neutral markets ; not being shut out 
by British monopoly commerce, which did not possess 
such cheap, valuable, natural untaxed-for-bounties 
sources of wealth. 

British foreign commerce would if not shut out of its 
free trade, by better American products, force American 
industry to export raw materials, and take payment in 
slaves, or whatever commercial monopoly-oppression, 
marauding commerce could procure by force, with the 
least value, this commerce making the price both ways to 
the labor of feeble, neutral nations. 

Washington, Hamilton, Adams, Monroe, Jefferson and 
other companions in arms for political independence and 
liberty from bounty taxation' of American labor without 



163 

its consent, did not contemplate a mere transference of 
this imperial power of bounty taxation to American mo- _ 
noDolies. Labor organized into States, was federated 
to be fi-ee from all exchanges that were not voluntary 
and equal — those that did not render an equivalent in 
return — to thereby have industry to be an independent 
power, free from debt. They believed that their duty 
was to protect the American foreign tree trade to thereby 
make ample market for all profitable American products ; 
that the conditions which enabled American industry to 
capture its own foreign free trade, would take care of its 
domestic free trade itself, preventing successful impor- 
tations of all foreign products that would restrict the 
production, free trade and patronage of American wealth 
at home ; voluntarily importing only those products that 
added to permanent American wealth which our fore- 
fathers never intended to have appropriated by a foreign 
commerce. American labor was to be protected from 
exporting any products that did not yield profits by their 
foreign exchange. The present policy is to force Ameri- 
can labor to get into foreign debt to alien monopolies 
who refuse to take anything but exported raw materials 
in payment. 

The federation of all American institutions designed 
to secure wealth in every stage of existence up to man- 
ufactures, from every charge, penalty or bounty that 
would tax the public interests for supporting private 
ones. This was believed to be the best protection, to 
insure a free trade market for the products of American 
labor at home and abroad, and enable it to keep pace 
with, and be full patron of American improvements of 
farms, mines, cities, harbors, public improvements, in- 



164 

eluding all American ; in preference to foreign natural 
monopolies, the use of which would cost the charges of 
foreign commerce, whi^h would be paid by American 
consumers only, and be spent abroad instead of pertain- 
ing to American natural monopolies and be spent at 
home. 

Possessory rights or freeholds of American real estate 
and natural monopolies are ordained by i^merican in- 
stitutions to be used for the public good, not its taxa- 
tion for bounties by their possessors ; these bounties to 
be exacted out of the common or public labor of the 
nation, and thereb}/ reduce its political condition to one 
of toil, that our forefathers have made free by the estab- 
lishment of these American institutions. There was to 
be established tariff restrictions — not to protect Ameri- 
can landlord aristocracies — but — to make a demand for 
the use of American natural resources for raw material 
to manufacture them at home, and thus protect Amer- 
ican labor holding the sources of wealth, by manufac- 
turing from these materials the products needed by 
American consumers that otherwise would be made 
abroad by use of foreign raw materials at least in part. 

All these were the purposes of the federation or co- 
operation of all the industries of the States, into one 
great political- combine of the United States of America. 
The federation was made to more effectually protect 
American individual liberty of free-trade than the States 
could, by extending its co-operation and limits. Its pow- 
ers were ample to secure all needed protection, and to 
prevent any internal monopolies that could live only by 
fattening on the common industries of the people, such 
as now have their grip on the throat of American in- 



165 

dustry, being secure in that life and death struggle, be- 
cause the great body of American industry has been 
overtaken, while ranging free on its own domain, floun- 
dered by the lasso of the present American tariff re- 
strictions, bound and made helpless for these vampires 
to feast on, and float off on wings of gold to Europe, 
only to exhibit their disregard of the political rights of 
American industrial citizenship. Their real estate agents, 
the party in power, have their office in Washingion, col- 
lecting rents or bounties on their American investments, 
and duly remitting to Europe. 

The practice of irresponsible power emanating from 
Washington, over the rights of wealth as they exist un- 
der their State governments, taxing these to protect 
favorites, is on a par with the power of the Roman em- 
perors emanating from Rome to plunder the provinces, 
leaving them to their gods and police regulations, but 
controling their wealth like State sovereignties dismant- 
led and divested of all liberties that are worth having, 
and that are as valuable to American citizenship as life 
itself — the liberties both white and black feel the loss 
of so severely — liberty to have a good decent living after 
having obeyed Creative injunction of having earned it. 

There is no industry that yields such an amount of 
profits to monopolies as the American. All Europe is 
investing in American railroads, mines, manufactures, 
&c., to secure a share. The American labor goose is 
more highly esteemed for its flavor by monopolists, than 
European, Australian — or even the Asiatic ^oose for all 
its labor is so cheap in price, but unproductive of in- 
come. The name of the most prolific goose for laying- 
golden eggs, of the present age, is rightly called "Ameri- 
c an labor." 



166 

To illustrate principles of exchange on a small scale, 
as they exist as at present, and as they should by pro- 
tection of Federal co-operation, the retail variety store 
in the country, remits local surplus flour, butter, eggs, 
poultry, vegetables, currency, &c., taken in barter for 
groceries, notions, <fec., to its place of nearest wholesale 
supply. These are partly consumed there, partly dis- 
tributed to domestic manufacturing populations, the re- 
mainder going to the emporium of supply. New York, 
to be exchanged there to supply the city, American ship 
stores and exports, to balance exchange. The New 
York wholesale dealer is paid with profit, all exchanges 
throughout being co-operative, mutual and free trade. 
All are out of debt, need no credit drawing interest, used 
for extention of time for payment. Each and all are 
doing well, no one losing any thing, every one accumu- 
lating some wealth. 

That is only if there are no tariff restrictions with 
penalties that prevent this form of free trade, mutual co- 
operative exchange of all American products with one an- 
other, thereby each helping the other to secure profits, 
there being a co-operative, mutual foreign exchange, by 
means of which American manufactures are exported by 
exchange direct, avoiding the European circuit with all 
its charges for American imported natural exchanges, 
those of tea, coffee, dye stuffs, &c. American operative's 
wages will then exchange in their home market for 
American flour, butter, eggs, &c., &c., there being more 
wealth to the producer of manufactures, to exchange for 
products of farms, mine and railroad produce, than to 
send to Europe to pay for imported exchanges. There 
will be no debt of foreign exchanges to absorb these 



167 

profits. All imports will be balanced by American ex- 
port manufactures. 

The operatives will have gotten, at less tax on their 
wealth, butter, cheese, kc. The producer of them will 
have saved the profits, called freight, insurance and ex- 
change to a foreign market. The manufactures, he will 
have helped to make by this co-operative exchange, will 
themselves exchange for his needed imported tea, coffee, 
&c., so that they will have cost the producers of flour, 
butter, manufactures, railroads, cities, harbors, <fec., less, 
and all be richer by this co-operative, mutual free-trade 
exchange. The operative in coal bounties or royalties 
will, however, sit in his coal bank and get nothing, while 
his neighbor on another hill within hailing distance is 
selling his wealth of coal for cost as the production of 
labor and profits on use of capital invested in improve- 
ments and the free use of the natural resources that cost 
him nil, because they only have been let for his private 
use by American society, which alone holds the right of 
sovereign domain and possession in common, and alone 
permits to invest private improvements on them, the use 
of which with labor is to produce raw materials, not 
charged with royalties, for use of American labor — not 
to oppress it. The conditions require that there shall 
be no monopoly, only average profits as the reward for 
producing national wealth, in furnishing American soci- 
ety such raw materials as it may want to give itself em- 
ployment and make its share of profits for itself — only 
as good profits as the invester in these raw materials 
makes out of them by his labor. 

If, however, tariff restrictions on American free trade 
so prevail that there is no home demand for American 



168 

raw materials to manufacture at home, the part of them 
that are thus made an arbitrary surplus — like wheat, 
cotton, silver, copper, etc., go abroad. Then London 
and other relativel}^ free trade cities of Europe are made 
the centres of both domestic and foreign American ex- 
change. American labor thereby loses its best and sure 
means of making wealth for itself by short hours of in- 
vigorating, life-giving industry, instead of long hours of 
endless toil for monopolies getting only a poor subsist- 
ence for that toil, the result being surplus raw materials 
deprived of a natural market. 

At this undisputed state of American exchange, parti- 
sans — who advocate tariff restrictions for revenue that 
shut off American free trade — say inter-State trade is so 
large that American labor, although all the wealth it 
produces is loaded down with perpetual debt of boun- 
ties to monopolies at home, and of usury for support of 
an income aristocracy of Europe, which its toil and the 
needs for its family abstracted, is supporting, because 
not getting value for what is exported by a foreign com- 
merce, is rich enough in the present political condition 
of its exchanges. It produces enough wealth, and- re- 
tains enough for its own good. It is the richest labor 
on earth. Is American labor rich enough? Does it 
get good enough wages ? Is it well employed ? Is it 
accumulating wealth by every stroke of labor, as the 
Federal relation provides it has right to ? 

American labor is in fact poor. Its ceaseless toil does 
not pay its expenses. It is yearly increasing its per- 
manent funded debts at home and abroad, not having 
enough to live on, and has therefore uothing to show 
what it has received for the contracts of debts it is 



169 

forced to make, except the possession of property bond- 
ed to absorb all its profits. 

The inter-State commerce is not even itself in a free- 
trade condition, wholly on account of tariff restrictions 
on its free trade abroad. It is taxed out of its profits 
-and made thereby to result in servile wages, therefore 
no free-trade-from-debt wealth to make profits by inter- 
State trade. 

A political right to interchange among the States, of 
itself, is not American free trade merely because of 
being free from custom duties. American labor does 
not have free trade so long as monopolies can restrict it 
by means of overcharges in cost of production for boun- 
ties that only make them richer and American labor 
poorer. 

American free trade cannot prevail, even with tariti' 
restrictions removed, if the law restricts in any other 
way free interchange by having it to cost more than 
enough for co-operative profits for all concerned. For 
an example, the giving monopoly privileges for issuing 
credit for currency, limiting the maximum, but leaving it 
to this monopoly to inflate or contract values of pro- 
duce, regardless of the natural law of supply and de- 
mand, traversing this free-trade law, by floating or 
withdrawing its credit to suit speculative, rather than 
productive interests. 

Tariff restrictions can be made to either protect or 
restrict American free trade. Granting that they are 
lawfully made to protect it, monopolies can engraft other 
schemes into law, to prevent American labor having fi*ee 
trade»or use of its wealth to thereby secure the profits it 
earns, but only by the party in power violating its po- 
litical obligations. 



170 

No American laborer — although he might export man- 
ufactures during a year of abundant production of do- 
mestic staple raw materials, these being too much of a 
surplus in the world's markets to make them a monopoly 
for holding the price up to point of tariff-restriction on 
foreign competing raw materials — would be safe from 
monopoly charges in building up a good-will of an ex- 
port trade. 

As soon as profits existed, he might be made to feel 
the screws of monopoly charges for some forms of raw 
materials he must have, thereby exacting these profits. 
The government does not protect the American manu- 
facturer from this raid on his wealth by the monopolist 
and income non-producer, but rather corrals him, so 
that he is helpless and must submit, unless he — an 
American laborer — compromises with the government 
by paying penalties for revenues only to support the 
government, and thereby the government protects this 
monopolist from all taxation. 

The laborer earning manufactures, railroad charges, 
wheat, silver, lead, iron, or any other form of wealth, 
must be protected from the oppression of monopolies in 
any event. The imperial reason for this protection is, 
these will demand more than equal-value, using tariff 
restrictions to tax high prices for living, instead of its 
having its proper sphere of making it cost less to live 
and less ]abor to make American products, for not only 
home consumption, but to have them, in every form of 
manufacture, make all foreign exchanges ; under which 
political status every kind of industry will be protected 
in the right of employment by having a free-trade,* good 
market for the sale of its own products, and the best 
market in which to buy subsistence. 



171 

American labor, manufactnring combination products, 
of high- value, purchasing power for foreign exchange, 
must be protected from any political interference of 
useless charges, which will only rob it of its profits to 
give them to private interests or monopolies. 

In the spirit of American institutions, there cannot be 
an American-monopoly foreign commerce, as is the 
British, which is built on political strata, the lowest layer 
of which is cruel human suffering, vice, oppression and 
ignorance. Its policy is to destroy all compensation to 
any labor that seeks profits for itself. 

The protection of American labor, in its fi-eedom from 
all charges on its wealth without its consent and value 
received, will best protect the value of American farms, 
mines, railroads, cities, harbors, &c. This is the only 
way for all American labor to secure wealth in use of all 
its capital in form of public and private improvements, 
and protect it from being a poor, toiling, degraded, suf- 
fering, estranged-from-society class — requiring force to 
keep down its discontent from wrongs for which politi- 
cal society is to blame. The class of labor that suffers 
and pays most, possesses the least. It is to be pitied 
and protected, so it can help itself. It is more sinned 
against than protected. 

When Federal custom duties are highest on raw ma- 
terials, and those edibles entering into consumption as 
they exist, that would be acquired by direct exchange of 
American products, the greatest proportion of American 
exports are raw materials, because such duties tax their 
use for manufactures at home. A larger proportion of 
American consumption therefore is of imported necessi- 
ties under such restrictions, but without them would be 



172 

luxuries, because their substitutes could be made cheaper 
^t home. 

With these conditions, there are less consumed of 
American manufactures, also of American shipping, 
brokerage, insurance and exchange, but more of the 
foreign, aggregating much less than if American labor 
was protected in retaining its own profits. 

American free trade — that is, American labor free from 
-all penalties on production that would restrict its own 
markets — results in easy, comfortable, contented, good 
times for all classes of American labor, from the highest 
to the very lowest. Every individual will have his nat- 
ural wants supplied, if he does not violate the natural 
laws of society, being -free to conform thereto. There 
will be no perpetual debt of interest to support an in- 
come, ruling class, accompanied with long hours of labor 
^nd excessive toil. This is the social condition of the 
Federal relation as our forefathers intended it should be. 
Its spirit is only with mutual, equal exchange in both 
inter- State and foreign relations. Tariff restrictions 
were to be used to protect equality only. 

American taxed trade — that is, American labor re- 
stricted by having to pay penalties for support of ah 
income class, to procure a government license to labor 
and produce itself a bare existence — results in suffering 
and hard times. If American labor is permitted to have 
possession of any wealth to use, it is thereby loaded with 
bonds for perpetual debt of interest, so that its income 
from this wealth is overcharged in cost of living. Labor 
gets only poor wages to itself, accompanied with long 
hours of excessive toil. This is the social condition of 
a society founded on a ruling, monopoly class, and a 



173 

toiling class, the law fostering — not protecting against — 
these conditions. 

The reason that Europe, particularly Germany, is 
detaxing the profits of her labor in a greater proportion 
relatively than is being done in America is, that she is 
becoming more Christianized in her politico-industrial 
policy. Perhaps her circumscribed condition is forcing 
this result. 

America is puffed up with pride at the unsurpassed 
area of her natural monopolies or resources for wealth. 
Her citizenship is spending its time in an intellectual 
spree, conscious of the productive powers of this great 
American heritage. She is becoming more chrystallized 
in the paganism of her governmental policy, ignoring 
Christian principles and duties in executing the trust of 
the Federal relation as affecting the several and common 
interests of the States, in their position of equality and 
sovereign independence or freedom from all claims 
against each other, and the outside world, including mo- 
nopolies that are alien to fundamental law. 

The representatives of the States, exercising the pow- 
ers of the Federal relation, have been allowed to become 
such, by not being too chary in observing the schemes 
of monopolies or private interests, which have chartered 
out in Washington every election district, in view of se- 
curing enough of the venal vote where needed to make 
electoral majorities in contempt of State's rights. 

To secure this power, monopolists have provided some 
political puppets, among their press adherents and 
speakers, to tell the people that America does not want 
any foreign trade — is better off without it. 

America must have some products of foreign labor, to 



174 

elevate tlie physical, moral, intellectual and religious 
plane of American labor above drudgery, servility, igno- 
rance and vice. Why not pay for them with those 
American manufactures that will retain the most profits 
to American labor, thereby incidentally using more 
American raw materials, consuming ]these in giving em- 
ployment to American citizenship, improving the value 
of real estate, making products of more purchasing- 
power manufactures, having the elements of American 
free trade and good wages m them, in the forms that are 
wanted for an export demand, at their free-trade prices, 
less bounty charges ; so that after providing enough for 
home wants there will be plenty of employment in mak- 
ing manufactures, that will buy all the imported pro- 
ducts that American citizenship needs. Such free labor 
will keep out of foreign debt, and have the Federal pro- 
tection in securing enough of American independent, 
self-employing occupation, and of the profits for co- 
operative capital for the populations in cities, to enable 
them to pay for all imported products, and have actually 
more left for home use, wherewith to patronize American 
capital invested in improvements of farms, mines and 
railroads, than if only raw materials contribute some- 
thing towards paying American necessary foreign ex- 
changes, leaving American society subject to foreign 
debt, obliged to give bonds on its wealth and sources of 
wealth, drawing perpetual interest earned by American 
toil to support a foreign income aristocracy. 

There will with this full protection of American labor 
and capital from monopoly rule, be no oppressed toiling 
class ground to poverty by the combined dead weight of 
society resting on it. There will be no suffering from 
poverty amidst plenty. 



175 

Eaw materials, bringing less than tliey should bring 
at home and less than they are worth if exported, ac- 
companied with the trade status that imported tea, 
coffee, &c., cost American consumers more than they are 
worth or would cost if paid for by free-trade American 
products making direct exchange, will cause any labor 
to tend to poverty. 

To stave off such consequences, the j)resent shifting- 
policy of the party in power at Washington, as well as 
its counterpart at Ottawa, having the same policy of 
patronizing monopolies and taxing labor, is to force the 
pledging of American natural monopolies and their im- 
provements, consuming the wealth obtained by this pol- 
icy of national funding for present needs, rather than 
export enough raw materials for such poor prices to 
keep out of debt. All this in a land where the most 
natural wealth abounds and can be produced for the 
least labor. The present policy is to keep up public 
credit as long as possible and secure all the wealth pos- 
sible to monopolies until universal, periodical insolvency 
occurs, because of American labor being forbidden the 
free use of the sources of wealth before its eyes and 
within hand's reach. 

Why is the wealth of American improvements of farms, 
mines, railroads, cities, harbors, &c., with all their valu- 
able natural monopolies, made unprofitable to American 
labor ? It is because of monopoly taxation of them — to 
secure profits at expense of the industries using them — 
this power being imperially exercised over the Federal 
relation, taxing the Federal right of free trade. To de- 
stroy a nation's free trade is to destroy its labor's wealth. 
This is why its wealth is owned abroad practically — by 



176 

the power of liens on it for debt — sold too cheap and 
cannot be redeemed ; because there is an arbitrary, im- 
perial, unprofitable market for labor to realize on its 
products. 

American labor cannot pay the stipulated interest 
'abroad and have enough to pay fixed charges of ex- 
penses, much less profits, hence is compelled to remit 
interest abroad, that should be retained to American co- 
operative producers as profits or capital, the balance 
being poor wages — those permitted American industry 
to possess. 

Why do the American people keep such treasonable^ 
partisans in power, who work only to get their wealth 
into general indebtedness with liens on all of it r 



> 



WHAT AEE THE PEESENT PEOFITS OF BEIT- 

ISH AND LOSS OF AMEEICAN 

FOEEIGN COMMEECE? 

" The Bureau of Statistics recently issued a statement 
from which it appears that the value of our merchandise 
exports during the expired three-quarters of the current 
calendar year was $538,741,023, of which $9,182,962 w^as 
foreign merchandise. The value of our merchandise 
imports during the same time was $582,799,062. The 
total value of our foreign commerce, therefore, exclusive 
of gold and silver, was $1,121,500,000 in round figures. 
For the same nine months the figures for Great Britain 
were : Exports of domestic merchandise, $910,000,000, 
and of foreign and colonial products, $236,400,000 ; 
total, $1,146,400,000. Imports, $1,549,000,000. Total 
value of foreign commerce, $2,695,400,000. The total 
value of our exports and imports was nearly $25,000,000 
less than the value of exports alone from Great Britain, 
and the British total of exports and imports was not 
much less than tw^o and a half times ours. Per head of 
population British foreign trade was about $57, while 
ours was only about $17. That is to say, British for- 
eign trade, in proportion to population, was nearly four 
times as great as ours. Such is the result of the policy 
of taxation on raw material." 

The above was clipped from the Utica (N. Y.) Daily 
Ohserver, Nov. 5, 1889. 

The Observer might pertinently have continued and 
said — such is the result of a policy forcing American 
12 



178 

raw materials like wheat, cotton, &c., for export, into the 
laps of British foreign commerce to build it up, instead 
of protecting American labor, so American manufactures 
would supplant raw materials for foreign exchanges, 
there being thereby a better market for manufactures 
abroad and a better one for raw materials at home ; 
American labor being relieved by such a free-trade con- 
dition from supporting an income class by its toil. 

Great Britain's monthly statements show that she pays 
for imports by her exports in kind, although the above 
extract does not o-mbrace this fact. British national 
wealth does not pledge itself to borrow capital. 

Gold and silver are not her money currency at all, but 
are among products of merchandise. Her legal tender 
and unit of measure of value of the products of all her 
commerce is her Bank of England issues of credit. It 
is never known how much wealth will buy it — what it 
will cost, being subject to fluctuations of value. 

This foreign commerce is out of debt. Therefore 
British labor does not earn the support of a non-resi- 
dent income class, as American does. 

The same statements also show that these paid-for 
imports are many millions more of dollars than her ex- 
ports. The difference represents the profits of British 
foreign commerce — the surplus accumulations of British 
wealth therefrom by exchange of manufactures to neu- 
tral nations, mostly. Monopoly accumulations, how- 
ever, with a poor, unprotected, unprovided, oppressed 
labor, is the result of the British system. 

American politicians under control of monopolies, and 
working in the official treadmill as a political party hold- 
ing Federal offices, have the gall to assert to American 



179 

labor, whose vote is paired off and nullified by tlie venal 
vote, tliat it, producing raw materials, must pay heavy 
penalties of bounties to American landlords, to get the 
license of Federal power to produce them. It must not 
after all this sacrifice of its wealth to pay these penalties 
or licenses, even have its only natural and good market 
for the sale of these — the home market, American labor 
is denied the right to sell to its co-laborers, its own raw 
materials low enough for them to manufacture for the 
wants of American consumers. These monopoly Amer- 
ican politicians also insist that these consumers shall be 
forced to pay penalties of custom duties on enough to 
support the department of American institutions called 
the Federal government, withholding raw materials 
enough for this purpose from manufacture for home use. 

American labor cannot pay all the bounties or rent 
charges exacted by monopoly landlords of natural re- 
sources, from the poor wages or small wealth it gets by 
not having its own home market for sale of its raw ma- 
terials, without being in perpetual poverty. 

It must therefore pay for all its imports of foreign 
exchanges with only its raw materials, which it is forced 
to produce as a surplus, because of being out of em- 
ployment producing manufactures for export on account 
of tariff restrictions made for other purposes than pro- 
tecting American labor in acquiring wealth — made for 
revenue out of profits of labor only, to establish an in- 
come, ruling class. If these surplus raw materials will 
not pay for its imports, American labor must pledge the 
profits arising from its natural monopolies to pay inter- 
est on the debt of foreign exchange. The bond to secure 
this pledge covers the c^ ntrol of all the improvements 



180 

on American natural resources, and the condition is, 
that unless the debt be paid, the interest accruing shall 
be a perpetual debt, running through all generations of 
those to whom American institiitions were bequeathed 
as a heritage of freedom to protect from such debts, 
thereby undermining these institutions our forefathers 
established by shedding their blood 

American politicians fortified behind the ramparts of 
monopolies at Washington, beyond the reach of State 
guns to force observance of the rights due their labor, 
pass Federal laws making such tariff restrictions, that 
there is no other possible way for American labor, but 
only in part to pay, in kind, for its foreign exchanges 
these to be only its products of raw materials ; therefore 
there is no way to prevent the obligation of perpetual 
debts of interest to support European income aristoc- 
racy, and of bounties to support a permanent American 
landlord aristocracy. This is the present political con- 
dition of American labor. Senators of New York once 
refused to stay behind ramparts built by monopolies. 
They resigned their seats rather than become responsi- 
ble for laws passed to rob American labor of the wealth 
it earned, and which the fundamental law of American 
institutions declared it had title to, freed from all penal- 
ties, it to be handed down through all their generations 
so long as American institutions exist ; which for the 
glory of our forefathers, may their existence be eternal^ 
although contemned by the supporters of the policy of 
the party in power. 

Unless American labor ships its raw materials, ther e 
being no other products for export, the wheels of do- 
mestic trade will stop. These heartless politicians — 



181 

who hold office, only because they vote to make all 
American labor toil ceaseless hours for a bare subsist- 
ence, by means of tariff restrictions for revenue, that 
their procurers of the yenal vote may possess without 
money or price all the surplus wealth or accumulations 
this labor ever produces — call this stoppage of the wheels 
of commerce, speculation by this impoverished Ameri- 
can labor. They want a movement forward, when the 
wheels of trade with the conditions of a credit for cur- 
rency to make an arbitrary value on these raw materials, 
will enable their supporters — monopolies — to speculate 
the value out of them into its own hands, leaving not 
money enough in poor American labor's hands to pay 
the doctor called in the night in case of sickness in his 
family, living with poor carpets on its floors of its sickly, 
death-dealing tenement houses, &c., &c. 

The right, to ask Federal protection of the value of 
the wealth American labor produces, is called specula- 
tion, by these vampires. American labor only asks to 
hold its own in place. It is satisfied Avith its natural 
value, but wants free trade to get that value. It does 
not ask the government to make a fiat value for its 
wealth, as monopolies do, which American politicians 
sent to represent the States in their Federal relations, 
provide for these monopolies by appropriating the 
wealth of American labor to them without any mutual 
free trade or consent of that labor, as the constitution 
provides. 

Must, then, these raw materials be sold abroad ? Is 
there no other sacrifice that can be made ? Cannot a 
few monopolies be sacrificed to save ? Is American 
labor bound to make any sacrifice at all to this alien^ 



182 

imported god — monopoly — the only import of the party 
in power, not as a necessity but an imperial luxury — 
foreign fashion ? Is there no market, at home, since 
American labor must have raw materials like these to 
live on ? Must foreign raw material made into manu- 
factures be imported to secure Federal revenues ? Does 
not the law of Federal protection of American labor's 
co-operation provide that there shall be a full demand 
for theirs at home ? Is it necessary to import any man- 
ufactures for the sake of revenue ? Is there need to us© 
foreign manufactures made from exported or foreign 
raw materials ? What inducement is there for Ameri- 
can labor to produce wealth, since the party in power 
says it is too servile and des^raded to possess it, unless 
pajdng interest on its value for its use to support in- 
come classes ? Is it possible for American labor to get 
the profits of the foreign exchanges by sale of its raw 
materials in the foreign market ? Is there not a glut, 
abroad, of the raw materials of all the servile labor of the 
world ? Then why not send American manufactures to 
these servile nations that can pay for them in American 
labor's necessities ? Does not British foreign commerce 
do this ? The answer is, that it would destroy all mo- 
nopoly power, and present office-holders would have to 
retire from posing in political postures. 

American labor has misguidedly — not incited by the 
educated classes, whom it has ignored, but by dema- 
gogues — voted itself into this political servitude, each 
voter getting his deserts, by voting to make a monopoly 
of his own natural-monopoly or source of wealth, so as 
to get the license to tax all American consumers of his 
particular products in monopoly prices, regardless of 



183 

the rights of labor involved, by protection of tariif re- 
strictions barring all foreign competition of raw mate- 
rials. He has finallv found out that as a class he has 
not only got left, but is forced to pay the penalties he 
voted to have the power to inflict on American labor. 
Instead of being able to extort all the profits a manu- 
facturer can produce, into his own pocket without a free 
trade, mutual equal exchange of value, preventing there- 
by the manufacturer exporting his products and buying 
for this would-be monopolist his tea, coffee, &c., cheaper 
than foreign commerce would do it for him, he has sim- 
ply deprived cities of natural, co-operative emplojanent, 
and of producing any wealth to impart to this monopo- 
list voter for his products of the ground and mine. He 
finds himself therefore more taxed than protected by 
this system of protection of monopolies of natural re- 
sources only, as he deprives his natural and best cus- 
tomers of the wealth to buy his products with, because 
he failed to vote to make co-operation profitable for 
both, by trying to get wealth both could produce to 
himself, by making his American co-operative laborer 
poor ; throwing all the net wealth from both into the 
hands of foreign commerce, by which it appears that 
that of Great Britain adds this much to her national 
wealth, included in the published statements of her im- 
ports and exports. He has voted — in violation of the 
contract of the constitution to preserve the credit of the 
States — to establish monopoly protection not in the 
spirit of American institutions, hence has no paying 
market to make his natural monopoly profitable — be- 
cause no society is going to labor for the benefit of only 
a part of it, except under compulsion of daily necessi- 
ties. 



184 

For what purpose is there such anxiety in trade cir- 
cles, that surplus raw materials of American labor, shall 
have no home market except what will impoverish the 
American labor producing them, such as wheat, cotton, 
&c., and be forced to be sent abroad ? To get rich by 
the profits ? No. But to pay up foreign indebtedness 
growing out of this kind of foreign exchange, caused by 
political oppressions maintained by the party in power, 
that American labor could not avoid ; no matter how 
hard it toiled, Iioav much wealth it consecrated, at sacri- 
fice of its family provision, on undeserved debts, how 
little it reserved for itself, solely because the party in 
power says by its edicts that American labor's condition 
must be only servile, or there cannot be an American 
landlord aristocracy to coach with its peers in Europe. 

When American labor holds its raw materials of wheat, 
cotton, &c. — the only surplus fruits its political restric- 
tions permits it to produce — the only reliance it has for 
its necessities — because prices are made so low in the 
foreign market, where all the servile labor products of 
the world are presented to be applied on debts of for- 
eign exchange — it feeling it must recoup somewhat of 
its bounty cost put on them to support American land- 
lord aristocracy — the sponsors for the party in power 
carry the echo of Wall street to Washington in a graph- 
aphone, " that there will be a tight money market," and 
" the liens on American labor's natural monopolies and 
improvements will be foreclosed by alien holders of 
them" and " the banks will be compelled to realize legal 
tender." There can be no more extensions of even the 
best of credit to save those engaged in commerce from 
loss, by payment of interest for the use of credit, it 



185 

being put beyond the reach of American industry to 
control it, by the cruel, ignorant, fraudulent policy of 
the party in power, it only establishing monopoly bank 
reserves of it. Even forcing the poor farmer and other 
American laborers — who vote for this condition of 
things under the lash of the whip of the " grand old 
party " of fraud and oppression, in their incompetence for 
self-government — to sacrifice their all . The sustainers of 
this policy find this is not enough, so periodically call 
on the government treasury to lend assistance to pri- 
vate monopolv interests, and demand that the govern- 
ment shall pay these monopolies a high premium on 
their bonds, to thereby release money from the public 
treasury, plausibly to relieve from the status it has 
placed American labor in. 

All this is because American laborers producing silver, 
copper, wheat, <fec., will be ruined by what wealth or 
wages they are likely to get, they being forced to crowd 
the foreign market with their owd poor American servile- 
labor wages, themselves being in debt, and denied by 
party policy in power, backed up by private interests, 
the protection of the home market to realize enough to 
pay debts in, by destroying the value the products of 
American labor will bring at home, which value would 
keep it out of debt, with plenty of par value legal-tender 
exchange products or wealth besides. 

This is a fair comparison of the British and American 
foreign exchanges. The discussion of this subject there- 
fore never comes to a focus. A diversionary view — in 
giddy intervals betAveen music and parades during Pres- 
idential campaigns — is presented, calling American la- 
bor's attention to the immensity of its territory and 



186 

actual production therefrom, claiming this is due en- 
tirely to the present political policy of the party in 
power. There is no word as to how much labor-saving 
devices have increased the volume of American wealth. 
American labor possesses, free from debt, however, none 
of this wealth. It is consumed in enhanced cost of liv- 
ing American consumers must submit to, causing a great 
deal of American income to be spent abroad for subsist- 
ence. 

The party in power cannot be brought to discuss- 
the subject of debts, except to say " credit continues 
good." 

After a very large quantity of low-priced raw materials 
are skinned from American natural resources and sent 
abroad, " money becomes easier," although the process 
impoverishes American labor and enriches monopolies 
to support the fraud. The lowest stratum of this labor- 
condition has a servitude as galling as that of a galley 
slave of the middle ages, one for which American society, 
and largely American labor itself, is responsible. It is 
true, the educated classes have provided modern labor 
with labor-saving devices, by which labor of to-day has 
better clothes, shelter and food than galley slaves, but 
it must wrestle with the storm all the same, and is 
charged with far greater care and responsibility, or it 
would perish outright. The leaven of Christianity may 
be credited with the better clothes, &c., the party in 
power tor the care, &g. 

To convert these into American manufactures only 
increases the penalties that its labor has to pay out of 
its profits or wealth, so that this alone prevents any 
American profits by having its own foreign commerce.. 



187 

There is no claim that British industry is in debt 
abroad. If it is in debt at home for income to support 
its aristocracy, this income is spent at home, consuming 
all produced and importations besides. Great Britain's 
financial status then is, that her capital is abundant, 
not being obliged to borrow it, or credit, from abroad .. 
America does both, still does not have enough with 
which to do a- foreign commerce of her own, for all that 
her sources of wealth and actual production are supe- 
rior, and would enable her to be richer than Great Brit- 
ain, but for her trade restrictions wholly in favor of 
private, at cost of her public, interests. 

Great Britain's imports represent her free trade, from 
successful competition, profits or national accumulations 
of wealth of her own foreign commerce — although large- 
ly made up of wealth produced by industries servile to 
their own monopolies — like American labor — bought at 
below its natural, good- wages value. 

They shoAv how much British wealth is accumulated 
by her foreign free trade, more than is expended to ac- 
quire it ; by which means British monopolies are easily 
able to carry the public debt, to thereby draw income 
also from the profits of British labor, as well as debts of 
foreign governments. 

It does not follow because British monopoly foreign 
con^.merce has a protected — by the folly of foreign gov- 
ernments — political status of a free trade to scalp the 
profits out of all the wealth produced b}^ foreign servile 
labor of the world for foreign commerce, that British 
labor itself has free trade. British free trade is not one 
in which both buyer and seller have profits, as would 
be the case if both industry's products interchanged 



188 

were free, by removing their political servility. This is 
the free trade American labor should hate, yet it is the 
only kind permitted it by the policy of the party in 
power. That is, it is permitted to send its raw materials 
abroad to be slaughtered by British foreign commerce. 
It is by the present tariff restrictions denied any other 
trade for them. 

What industry works harder than the American ? 
What makes it work harder ? Is it because it is getting 
richer by its industry ? Is it not because it is yearly 
.getting poorer ? Is not the value of its wealth getting 
less, because getting more liens for debt and usury on 
them ? Is it not struggling to save what it has, trying 
to be able some day to live on its savings, subject to 
continued taxation for right to use them ? 

How many Americans are throwing off their work 
harness ? Is not American industry actually owning 
less wealth yearly, monopolists of America and Europe 
absorbing it ? Is there not a lack of American foreign 
free trade ? Is not this caused by the party in power, 
favoring only private interests at public cost? 

Any excess of imports over exports, under the present 
tariff trade restrictions on American wealth, would be 
ruinous to American domestic and foreign credit. This 
status would be without alternative, but of idleness, va- 
grancy and want — of enforced scarcity of wealth. The 
load of debt would and does in fact grow to be too 
heavy, breaking connections, and business engagements, 
periodically liquidating through the sponge process of 
insolvency, accompanied with a paralysis in production. 

American labor will not be permitted by the policy of 
the party in power to co-operate with the capital it pro- 



189 

duces to thus acquire the wealth it needs. This capital 
is put beyond its reach as fast as produced by its politi- 
cal conditions. Having no productive foreign exchanges 
on this account, it will be compelled to increase its for- 
eign indebtedness with increased population. If the 
spirit of American institutions prevailed, this increased 
population would increase the national free-from-debt 
wealth, and wipe out the debt, the follies of the past 
have so industriously culivated, and stop the perpetual 
debt of interest American labor now provides by its toil 
to support an income European aristocracy.* The pres- 
ent policy of Federal restrictions on American labor's 
acquisition of wealth will force to increase foreign debt, 
and therefore its greater degradation and a greater pro- 
portion of society to toil to support an income political 
establishment. 

These Federal trade restrictions prevent American: 
labor from manufacturing its own raw materials for ex- 
ports to buy its foreign exchanges, but compels it to 
pay European labor for doing it, largely using foreign 
raw materials, while itself remains idle and American 
natural resources are less used. So many charges there- 
fore come out of it, that it causes the value of exports 
to be less than they naturally would be for the profit of 
American labor, and of imports to cost more than if 
American labor did its own manufacturing for export, it 
paying the tariff for revenue on these to support the 
government. All this shows that American industry is 
deprived of its foreign commerce, and has to pay so 
much to have it done, that it is in perpetual debt and 
poor. 

All charges of freight, insurance and exchange made 



190 

by a foreign commerce with America, are taken out of 
American raw materials exported, and then appropriated 
io British monopolies, while profits are included in 
British imports of wealth accumulations. Thereby there 
is established the political condition of .a tenant class 
among American farmers, miners and railroad operatiyesg 
What railroad operative is able by savings to own any 
stock in railroads : What of manufacturing stock ? All 
American labor is made by its political condition to be 
too poor to own any property or stock in these improve- 
ments, to thereby have its co-operative help to make it 
more independent and forehanded, not be a mere cease- 
less toiler from an arbitrary political pressure on the 
margin of subsistence. American labor would then 
build its own ships and make its own foreign exchanges. 

Daniel Webster, for all of his adhesion to labor de- 
spoiling electoral majorities of his day, personally ob- 
jected to the system of tariff restrictions on American 
production of her own wealth, that destroyed the free 
trade pertaining to New England's foreign commerce of 
exchange in kind, also her inter-exchanging with neutral 
markets by New England's free labor. 

He explained how imports might be in excess of ex- 
ports yet not incur indebtedness abroad, but rather add 
accumulations of American wealth and these belong to 
American labor, not to monopolies, as British com- 
merce now does to her monopolies. 

He said, in array of facts substantially, that American 
<}apital merged into the body of a ship, laden with Amer- 
ican flour, employing for its co-operation the docks, and 
sailing from a political co-operative organization of cor- 
porated capital of improvements, called Boston, could 



191 

go to Spain under Federal protection of New England's 
free trade from charges of bounties by monopolies on 
American raw materials, added to the cost of the Ameri- 
can wealth of a ship laden with flour. It could ex- 
change this fi'ge trade — from any charges except for the 
profit of American labor — American wealth of flour to 
become the wealth of Spain (which might be charged 
up in price on Spanish consumers by tariff penalties, if 
Spain chose) for Spanish wealth of wine. 

With the Tvine, the co-operative system of American 
labor called its commercial marine could sail for the 
West Indies, exchange for the wealth of tobacco, sugar, 
&G., and carry this newly produced American wealth 
back to starting point, using American capital called 
Boston for port and dockage, storage and exchange, &c., 
paying a profit to the co-operative owners of this wealth, 
the return cargo of American wealth being much better 
in value to American industry than its original crude 
wealth of flour. 

It may be pertinently queried, how much sugar, to- 
bacco, &c., would this American flour have brought to 
American producers of ships and flour, if they Avere re- 
stricted by charges out of them for bounties to build up 
an income class. Would not these wages have been 
produced in some other country with less bounties ? 
American laborers could not — loaded with them — build 
American ships. Themselves would be walking about 
the wharves, looking at British ships passing American 
Lighthouses, which American labor must provide. 

Then British commerce would buy this flour, and im- 
port this wealth of sugar, tobacco, tropical truits, <fcc. 
With American poHtical conditions causing this result, 



192 

how much more of this wealth would British foreign 
commerce leave as paid for American wealth of sugar,, 
tobacco, &c., than would be left by free trade American 
foreign commerce ? 

Some thoughtful American school boys, contemplating 
their prospects of getting wealth and independent posi- 
tion in life — would, in their restless, free thought, con- 
clude that there should be no restrictions on the produc- 
tion of American wealth, if this were to result in Ameri- 
can ships doing free trade American foreign commerce.. 
They would like a Paul Jones trial with American ships 
freed from the political obligation of paying certain pen-^ 
alties to some aristocratic, politically-constructed Amer- 
ican hog, or monopolist of American labor's own mate- 
rials before that ship could be built — before they could 
acquit themselves as becomes enterprising American 
citizens in the spirit of American institutions. They 
would hardly rest content with a political party that 
would be so truculent to the jnonopolist as to deprive 
American citizens of anything but the servile conditions 
of Europe. They would like a free trad^e contest with 
British monopoly foreign commerce. They would ask- 
no subsidies, but simply protection of their rights. 

There are, however, some private interests to be sub- 
served by the party in power, becaus® election expenses 
have been paid by these private interests, so that spoils 
of office might be secured. The agreement the party in 
power has made, in 'which you, ambitious school boy,, 
have your vote paired off with a venal vote^ nullifying 
your political rights, by which monopoly shall rob in- 
dustry and leave it poor, while this monopoly power- 
shall possess all the capital of the- nation. You,, school! 



193 

boy, having the generous, enterprising spirit of your 
forefathers, are to have that spirit crushed out of you» 
You are to be a wheel horse hitched beside a servile 
toiler imported from Europe or Asia, required to keep 
your end of the evener on the fare to which only servile 
labor is bred. You will have no means to cover your 
hands with gloves, but must develop horns on them like 
your servile peer in harness. You, school boy, are 
growing up and being educated to work for this monop- 
oly's profit, not your own. You are to have no political 
protection for the capital you produce, that will enable 
you to secure the profits as your property. Monopoly 
supremacy at Washington has decided that the party in 
office shall pass laws controlling by Federal power, all 
elections by States, so that these communities with na- 
tional powers shall not be represe-nted. They shall be 
less than the rights of nations accord. Only monopoly 
shall rule, shall pervade all political atmosphere. This 
power shall be irresponsible to the States, even if mo- 
nopoly shall be forced to provide the venal vote to give 
it a majority. You — school boy — shall not have any for- 
eign commerce and be an American citizen at the same 
time. This monopoly power has other uses for you. It 
has a tread mill for you to toil in. You are to be a 
mudsill. You are being educated to toil for monopoly. 
Technical schools are to be established, so you will learn 
to be worth more to monopolies. You are to have in- 
stilled into your being, that this is the religious duty of 
obeying your master, but are never to draw a breath of 
free American air. It is to be provided for you only to 
give your strength to toil for monopoly. You may have 
one of the cheapest, poorest carpets American servile 
13 



194 

labor makes, on the floor of a tenement house, with such 
poor sanitary provision, that yon cannot earn enough to 
pay doctors' bills. You will forever be too much worn 
out in service of monopoly to enjoy that carpet. In 
election times you will be twitted for having that carpet, 
and told by your masters that if you free yourselves 
from their service, the carpets must go. A campaign 
lie of course. These servile conditions are to be your 
future lot as an American citizen, when the State you 
were born in is fully denationalized. Your children are 
to grow up more degraded than yourself, as population 
crowds upon the monopoly controlled margin^ of subsis- 
tence, that monopolists withhold from you, of which, 
however. Creative power has provided an abundance for 
every human being ever to be created, as Christian 
ethics teach, if the power of monopolies does not violate 
the natural law of distribution, such as is established in 
tlie United States by our forefathers. The party in 
power holds its offices only on condition that this natu- 
ral law established by Creative Power, and also ordained 
to be the rule of American institutions, shall be trodden 
under foot, and American liberties of free trade be a 
laughing stock — self-government a failure. 

The politico -industrial point Mr. Webster made, was 
that American free trade wealth acquired at small cost 
of its labor to produce flour and ships, was co-operatively 
converted by natural selections and survival of the fittest 
under Creative law, into the good wages or great wealth 
of tobacco, sugar, &c., by the profits of tramp foreign 
commerce in neutral markets, at the same time making 
competent exchange for all the home wants of American 
income consumers, to keep them from spending their 
wealth abroad, as well as the wants of labor. 



195 

If bouuties for use of American monopolies of natural 
resources could make the cost of growing this co-opera- 
tive wheat greater, also the co-operative mill that grinds 
it, and the co-operative railroad that must carry this co- 
operative flour into co-operative capital, called Boston ; 
then other flour costing less bouties, anti-coperative 
with the capital of American labor, however, could start 
from London and earn all these profits for British mo- 
nopoly accumulation of wealth. The British ship would 
touch a portion of American natural monopolies on 
which are located American wealth called Boston, which 
has cost its owners about double its labor cost on ac- 
count of the charge of landlord bounties. This British 
ship will pay Boston its charges, charging enough more 
for sugar, tobacco, &c., which American consumers will 
have to pay, the profits all going abroad to swell British 
wealth ; while one class of American society — that por- 
tion engaged in fencing off American labor from fi*ee 
use of the sources of wealth — is engaged in absorbing the 
wealth of another, instead of all co-operating in produc- 
ing wealth, that the profits of foreign commerce be add- 
ed to the national wealth. 

These American foreign-commerce, free trade products 
of sugar, tobacco, &c., under New England's former sta- 
tus of political protection to her free trade with its sail- 
or's rights, by execution of the control of the Federal 
relation in behalf of her American rights of free labor, 
foreign exchange in President Jackson's time — would 
be American, not European possessions, although earned 
by American labor. Their owners — American labor — 
would therefore be additional patrons of American farms, 
mines, railroads, highways, canals, harbors, &c., making 



196 

a natural monopoly increment of profits for use of Amer- 
ican natural resources or advantages — instead of con- 
tributing them as bounties to Europe for support of her 
income aristocracy and a navy for cooling the ardor of 
American labor. 

American labor's flour would be placed in Spain, in- 
stead of British monopoly flour ; free trading that much 
more production of the American federation's flour into 
the more commercially profitable American products of 
sugar, tobacco and other mutual, natural tropical ex- 
changes. 

If it turned out that there was more sugar, tobacco, 
&c., imported, than needed for home use, these would 
not be London pawned-for-debt junk, but paid-for sur- 
plus accumulations of American wealth. They would 
be the net profits of American foreign exchange, cost- 
ing nothing but free intelligent American labor, making 
the foreign exchange of the world in all neutral markets, 
including Canada — American sources of wealth being 
free to the axe, pick, shovel and hoe for American labor 
to begin the production of its own wealth. 

The base of supplies for distribution would not be in 
the free city of London or Hamburg, but by use of Ameri- 
can capital invested on American natural resources, doing 
business under the name of Boston, in this case ; the 
owners of which need not have to make an extra charge 
beyond what would be a good return for use of this cap- 
ital called Boston, because Federal power says it has 
promised and engaged the Boston labor shall contribute 
its quota of bounties to some monopolies that are doing 
their best to prevent the owners of this American capital 
called Boston, making any money by co-operating with 



197 

other American capital of ships and manufactures in 
making foreign exchanges for the profits they make for 
American capital o^vned by American labor. 

As political conditions now exist, American labor can- 
not use its capital invested and doing business under 
the name of Boston by right of the State of Massachu- 
setts. It, by direction of imperial power from Washing- 
ton, is told that it must look out to sea and sing its dirge 
for the death of American industrial liberties ; no bustle 
of business to break the sounds of the free sea breeze 
as it wails its requiem to American foreign commerce. 
All its suriDlus labor may take its knapsatsks and tramp 
to Pennsylyania, where monopolists will giye it plenty 
of work, gauging the price of what it will cost to feed 
this American star of Empire moving westward, by 
cabling first to London to learn the price the breadstuffs 
of the servile labor of the world daily being closed out 
*' under the rule " for debt, the price they expect to pay 
Western farmers. 

In his day, Webster voted to have a tariff for revenue 
only to suit the behest of a political party under the 
name of a protective tariff. It is the same party which 
the Senators of New York refused to obey, but resigned 
their seats, when obedience demanded the degradation 
of the State of New York representative power ; the 
same party of monopoly which might give Webster the 
Presidential nomination, whereby he would be compelled 
to curb his free New England spirit, and serve monopo- 
lies. It was his price as a Northern politician serving 
monopolies, for political honors this monopoly-support- 
ing party might confer. This was no less than the deg- 
radation of the foreign industry of free trade and sailor's 



198 

rights of New England, preventing thereby the other 
States of the federation from partaking of her prosperity 
attending the co-operation that this policy prevented. 
This caused all American labor to be restrained by tariff 
restrictions, from the privilege dear to every American, 
that of attaining personal and family independence by 
acquiring profits as his capital by his own unimpeded 
enterprising industry ; exchanging his products without 
feeling the arbitrary status of a tight money market, be- 
cause his independence to secure the profits of free 
trade is protected ; his own right arm — his own labor — 
not having the incubus of Federal trade and penalty re- 
strictions laid on it, compelling it to support an oppres- 
sive ruling class — being able to undersell for all kinds 
of foreign wealth and pay for it, buying bullion to make 
his internal legal tender exchanges with, if the producer 
of American bullion attempted a monopoly of it ; pro- 
tecting, however, the American producer of American 
bullion from all penalties in cost of production, 
that would prevent his getting all the profits to be made 
in producing it; American labor then — not Great Britain's 
monopolies — owning the accumulations of free trade 
foreign commerce made by itself ; America being the 
store house of exchange — the centre of the world's com- 
merce — no produce of American labor held as junk for 
penalties. 

Webster voted that Boston should not make wealth 
by American foreign commerce. If he defended New 
England's free trade, his political ambition bevond his 
own State might be thwarted. He voted the liberties of 
his State should be subject to imperial power emanating 
from Washington. His own neighbors were therefore 



199 

not permitted to say what they should eat, drink and 
wear, what houses they should live in, or what they 
should think. 

American manufactories have never been closed, only 
for the one great cause, the exhaustion of all their wealth 
to pay bounties to American private interests in natural 
resources, except for a false currency for speculation. 

If untaxed for bounties, American manufacturers can 
undersell Europe to-day, because they can produce and 
own this production in a larger amount, including the 
manufacturers of ships, for the same labor, than British 
labor can, which must by the Constitution of Great 
Britain support an income aristocracy. 

Is it not high time that the fool-killer come round and 
destroy a few American voters, who serve monopoly, 
rather than defend the Federal free trade at home and 
abroad, and thereby the protection of all the liberties of 
American labor. 



THE VALUE OF BKITISH, ALSO OF AMEEICAN 
WAGES OE WEALTH TO THE LA- 
BOR PRODUCING THEM. 

This labor tliat possesses no monopoly of natural 
resources of wealth, must buy raw materials to convert 
them into itS own wealth of manufacturers ; or else be 
a class of co-laborers with manufacturers, the wages 
being what this labor receives as employees. If the po- 
litical status is one of free labor, it will receive co- 
operative profits; if a servile status of labor, it will re- 
ceive only bare subsistence. 

The value of such wages or wealth is treated as 
being under their present political status in both coun- 
tries, subject as they are to penalties on their economi- 
cally necessary free trade compromises with the govern- 
ments of modern civilization. The prior and most dam- 
aging compromise or commutation, is landlord monopoly. 
The secondary and most subtle one — the monopoly of 
credit for currency — is able to drive out legal tender as 
the unit of measure of values of all other wages or 
wealth. This latter monopoly however would be more 
tolerable if landlord monopolies were abolished, because 
income from such monopolies w^ould. then be spent em- 
ploying the industries producing it in all kinds of pub- 
lic improvements, including foreign commerce equip- 
ment of improvements for use on the natural highways 
of the seas — of ships, harbors, lighthouses, &c. — as well 
as diversified manufactures at home. 

Monopolies result in the expenditure of incomes for 



201 

living, employing any industry's products for subsist- 
ence, if there are less charges of penalties on them. 

To secure a dependent tenantry landlord monopolies 
permit only the use of so much of the sources of Amer- 
ican wealth as will be needed to manufacture for home 
use, where they are protected in forcing bounties out of 
American consumers. 

Is the wealth of American labor blessed with all the 
liberty, or free trade in foreign exchange in which it has 
the Federal right to be protected ? The party in power 
assures American labor it has enough for its own good. 
Has American labor enough of free trade for its best 
interests ? Would any more, by releasing bounty 
charges on American wealth, destroy its value and there- 
by close up American manufactures ? Would American 
consumers be using imported manufactures — such as 
a servile population could only buy — causing thereby 
American manufactures to be unprofitable to labor ? 

Can American citizens continue to use importations, 
without paying for them in their own wages ? If in only 
their poor wages of raw materials below value — below 
what British labor can produce them for British monop- 
olies — because they have a no-free-trade-home market, 
American consumers must at best have only a few of 
them, and be very poor indeed. They may have more 
of them by getting into debt, pledging their natural mo- 
nopolies and public improvements — of railroads princi- 
pally — to secure that debt with the perpetual debt of 
interest saddled on American labor. 

The difference in the value of the wealth of British 
and of American laborers, making the condition of labor 
to be higher in America than in Great Britain, if this be 



202 

so, is not in the number of competing laborers in Brit- 
ain ; but in the taxation that falls more heavily on the 
earnings of British labor, compelling its flow into arbi- 
trary channels of production, those of exports, by which 
to better provide its sustenance, in place of those not 
earned, on account of restrictions made on their free 
trade by the taxation of landlord bounties, established 
under the British constitution. 

With these detractions from British wages, it is be- 
coming more apparent that the rule of bount}/ exactions 
out of American wages may really become more oppres- 
sive to American production, than British penalties on 
her labor is to British production. Hence, for the same 
labor, British citizens may be able to acquire more 
wealth to themselves after their support of monopolies^ 
than American. 

There is naturally no surplus of laborers in the Brit- 
ish Isles, but rather room and need for more, to improve 
the value of the co-operative wealth of each, presuming 
all wealth to be free from penalties, so that there would 
be a better availability of British natural resources. 

A large increase of laborers in America would have 
the effect of only raising the value of American wealth 
to its jDroducers, so that American industrial people of 
every class, even to the lowest stratum and grade of de- 
velopment, could own a greater accumulation of wealth 
to themselves severally or individually, with the same 
amount of labor, if American wealth had its Federal and' 
natural liberties, by protection of freedom from irre- 
sponsible imperial abstractions to support a rule over 
them, preventing their co-operation to produce wealth 
for themselves. 



203 

Charges are made on British manufactures for foreign 
freight, insurance and exchange to import free-from- 
British-taxation raw materials, also cost of export of all 
manufactures they produce. Still they compete suc- 
cessfully with the foreign manufactures at home and in 
the foreign trade, including neutral markets. 

The fact that a few lines of German and American 
manufactures are consumed in Birmingham — during 
American Presidential campaigns principally, however 
— on account of labor-saving devices and new econom- 
ical forms of products, ahead of British development, 
only teaches her labor a lesson how to improve the value 
of her own manufactures, these imported manufactures 
never gaining any permanent foothold. This is not 
enough to permanently supplant the use of British man- 
ufactures in their own markets, and compel an export 
of her raw materials, to buy tea, coffee, &c., as American 
policy forces to do with the raw materials American 
servile labor produces for them. 

British monopoly simply learns how to make these 
imported manufactures, or makes more of others for the 
same labor by the use of them, in manufacturing her 
exports — than by their exclusion. No political party of 
the British empire would hear of their exclusion, as the 
means of maintaining British foreign commerce, or even 
home free trade. The tory, landlord-monopoly, polit- 
ical party in its pride of British empire, would yield it& 
own political powers of entailments, rather than British 
commerce be not mistress of the seas. It does not, 
however, require such a strain of patriotism, so long as 
the world's industries are servile. 

Such a regeneration of the life of British industry as 



204 

the abolition of land entailments would produce, would 
be, because it determined to assert its risjlits of internal 
as well as external free trade, to avail itself of tlie pro- 
duction of wealth such a field for its development would 
afford. 

There are, however, some of British raw materials 
which are produced in part from her own natural re- 
sources, such as improved w^ater courses and powers, 
cities, harbors, railroads, habitations, agricultural and 
mineral products, including wool, iron, coal, tin and 
others, the cost of obtaining which is not made a mo- 
nopoly-charge for use of natural resources, enough to 
embargo domestic and foreign free trade for British 
commerce. 

The landlords of natural resources hold the balance 
of power, as to British free trade. The}^ take all the 
royalties or bounties they dare, and that is made to de- 
pend on how much imported raw materials are bought 
below natural, free-trade value, of those nations in debt, 
on account of restrictions on their free trade that destroy 
their own home natural market, and internal manufac- 
tures for export — including American raw materials from 
this reason. 

British spirit of liberty would not submit to even this, 
only that her trade can profit enough by the folly of the 
American, and other people's, too ignorant for self-gov- 
ernment, so that these conditions protect her monopoly 
foreign free trade. 

It is not so much the low wages of British industry 
that makes her manufactures so cheap, but because she 
merges so many foreign products, Jike wheat and cotton, 
which return less wages to their American producers — 



205 

those that are forced on her markets at below natural 
wages value, to apply on the balance of the debt of for- 
eign exchange. 

British possessions are not in debt. British monop- 
olies have the cash with which to scalp the products of 
the world — to speculate on foreign necessities — and as 
the labor of all nations is being taxed by monopolies, so 
that it cannot have enough of profits or capital — and 
cannot therefore manufacture, and must find market for 
raw materials, among those nations that tax less to sup- 
port monopolies, where they can get at least something 
for them, as better than home taxations permit them to 
get, fco pay for quinine and other foreign necessities they 
must have in one way or other ; all these competing 
products of serf labor, including those of America, make 
London their junk shop. 

This enables British monopoly scalpers of foreign pro- 
ductions — of industries in debt — to buy below value. 
This we are told is protection of American industry, to 
give it employment. It dees give it employment pro- 
ducing poor wages in shape of raw materials. 

Why cannot American industry be less partisan, and 
see such patent facts? What necromancy surrounds 
and enchants it ? What makes it to be such an infant 
industry — in such helpless misery ? It has no need to 
go to London for any of its foreign exchanges whatever. 
It has enough of everything with which to make its own 
direct exchanges, and not get the poor wages the party 
in power now forces it to take. It can provide itself 
with the best of wages — in ample supply for all its needs. 
It can collar the venal vote and thrust it aside. By its 
vote it can rid itself of paying tribute to monopolies. 



206 

To enable American manufactures, not to be ahvajs 
working as infant industries — needing to tax consumers 
for charges on them by American monopolies — it will be 
necessary to forbid receiving bounties for use of Ameri- 
can natural resources, and depend on them, thus pro- 
tected, to furnish the cheapest raw materials in the 
world, getting themselves the best wages in foreign 
free trade, from manufactures of them, they getting their 
share of the profits of manufacture. 

American manufacturers, being exporters, will be no 
more infant industries, asking tariff-protection to serve 
private interests. 

At present American laborers or manufacturers are 
taxed more by home monopolies, than they are protected 
against free trade in foreign manufactures, so must in- 
evitably receive no profits, after supply overtakes de- 
mand. 

American landlords should be satisfied with their nat- 
ural monopolies — of the saving of freight, insurance and 
exchange, which foreign competing sources of wealth 
must pay. This would enable them to produce free- 
trade raw material against home competition of foreign 
raw materials, and yield the most wealth in the world to 
American labor, having no need to be afraid of the 
world's free-trade competition among neutral nations ; 
making tariff restrictions to protect only the public in- 
terests, in which all profit, by putting a penalty on all 
foreign entangling alliances of trade, the currency of the 
products of which would only compel American labor to 
receive less value than it gives. 

Coal, iron, stone and other raw materials, form the 
basis for production of British improvements of cities, 



207 

harbors, manufactories, &c., because the lords of British 
natural resources dare not hold the cost of their use too 
high, for the dignity and freedom of British foreign 
commerce. These are merged with the sacrificed-for- 
debt imported American raw materials, and help make 
the British manufactured products, which are so valuable 
for foreign commerce because thej have cost British 
monopolies so little, combined with the cheap wages of 
British labor. 

This labor is circumscribed in the production for its 
own use, of bare subsistence, by government protection 
of landlordism ; one human being being better in the 
eyes of the British government than another, as it is 
now in America. It is denied a natural employment on 
British soil, to produce self-sustaining wealth, as well as 
by foreign commerce. 

The great imperial, arbitrary help to British laborers 
or manufacturers of products for foreign commerce, that 
prevents depreciation to their extinction, by the compe- 
tition of American free trade, is the over and unequal 
taxation on the production of the wealth of other coun- 
tries. 

These restrictions are so great on American manufac- 
tures, that not enough are even produced for domestic 
free trade, these having imported manufactures to com- 
pete with — much less an export free trade. From pure 
poverty of them, others are substituted by importations 
from Europe, China, Japan and other countries, the 
condition being affected by the status of foreign labor, 
tending to bring American labor to the same level, if 
tariff for revenue — not protection — prevails. The policy 
of the party in power is so timed that manufactures 



208 

would, after these charges being paid on raw materials, 
leave less wages to the American wages-earner or man- 
ufacturer producing them, than to the British — prevent- 
ing his being able to pay good wages to his American 
operatives — politically co-operatives, if the spirit of the 
law of the American federation of all her industries be 
observed. 

The lackeys of monopolies say the American manu- 
facturer pays better wages to his operatives than corre- 
sponding British wages. Is this a fact, or a political 
lie ? No doubt the American manufacturer could pay 
more for the intelligent co-operation of his labor, if re- 
lieved from bounty charges for raw materials. How can 
he if he has no entire, free-trade home market and can- 
not export at all ? How can he realize enough out of 
his products to pay good wages ? As for producing 
American manufactures for domestic consumption, the- 
manufacturer does nominally pay more, in inflated val- 
ues ; but this appears to be the case only where by 
labor-saving devices and greater deftness of operatives, 
he is compensated by greater returns in quantities of 
manufactures. This condition is not prevalent nor last- 
ing, because piece work and specially high-priced work 
is forced down in this, the present restricted, home 
market. 

American manufactures, that would be domestic and 
foreign free-trade products, and create their own de- 
mand at home and abroad, if monopoHes could not col-^ 
lect bounties from them, now actually give way for 
employment to British operatives. The policy of the 
party in power is, to enrich Cobden Club monopoly.. 
It makes a demand for British manufactures, and biiilds. 



209 

up the value of British monopolies of foreign commerce. 
American labor in the mean time is wearing out its old 
clothes in retirement, in poor, rented, high-priced homes 
— carpets on the floors, &c. 

How much harder would it be for American competi- 
tion in foreign commerce, if the British nation chose to 
make all her natural monopolies and improvements, 
free-trade capital, and pay her lordships from the civil 
list entirely — adopting gold as the legal tender and unit 
of measure, British labor thereby being made free ? 

Then monopolies — the cause of any low wages that 
are the lot of British producers — having gotten wages 
of its labor too low, so much so that any riore fall in 
them would cause an unwilling expatriation from " mer- 
rie England" — an emigration with extinction of the 
production of exportable manufactures — the British gov- 
ernment must stay its hand — must do a little more pro- 
tecting, by means of a little less bounty and penalty 
charges. Further arbitrary depreciation of the value of 
British wages must cease. The monopolies engrafted 
on the liberties of the British constitution, must curtail 
the measure of their wrongs. They must not starve the 
British-labor goose that lays golden eggs, so long as 
other countries cause no barriers to immigration. 

What further helps depreciate the value of wages of 
British industry is that they must in the hands of their 
producers, be parted with in larger quantities for habi- 
tations — ground rentals of some form or other to stated 
lordships or government conditions — as a storage place 
for cities, harbors, railroad and canal easements, &c. 

If there is any other method of just as good govern- 
ment-protection that would better secure tue rights of 
14 



210 

free trade, due to all of British production of wealth 
alike for benefit of British labor, and that would encour- 
age production more, by costing less of bounties and 
penalties to maintain it, then there exists an imperial, 
civil-law oppression upon natural human rights of Brit- 
ish citizenship. 

Another taxation, or penalty, taken out of British in- 
dustry's wealth, as a condition of its production, is on 
its subsistence of tea, coffee, sugar, tobacco, beer, and 
spirits. These alone pay the largest part of British 
fiscal revenue. These penalties come mostly out of the 
poor laborer's pocket, preventing his children being as 
good in the eyes of the law as the children of lordships 
— the State providing less for them. 

The American, Federal principles of protection are 
the reverse of those submitted to by British industry, 
under the British constitution. These declare for the 
free trade of American wealth of every kind, in every- 
body's hands, absolutely and unequivocally — their lib- 
erty, independence, and the protection of the full value 
of them to their producers, as the imperial, political 
duty to be enforced in execution of the contract of the 
Federal relation for the equal protection of all the in- 
dustries of the different States, showing partiality to 
none. 

American laborers take their lessons in political 
schools of monopolies, and are taught therefore to laugh 
at free trade — the only means of their deliverance from 
the bondage of perpetual debt. They do not organize 
for protection by co-operation, but by labor monopoly 
organizations and capital combines to make products 
scarce, and thereby tax one another as consumers for 



211 

self-protection against the wrongs of civil law, instead 
of organizing to remove political restrictions of penalties 
that support ruling classes. Labor monopoly organiza- 
tions simply tax fellow or co-laborers, and therefore the 
cost of living on themselves. Labor by its Federal vote 
must abate tariff restriction penalties on production of 
wealth and work for itself. It must reform tariff re- 
strictions by united vote, so as to prevent monopolies 
getting any wealth without labor. 

The political party in power, in order to prevent 
American labor possessing any Avealth, has pledged itself 
in its last national platform to a Federal policy, declar- 
ing that it abandons " no part of its present system of 
protection," which includes that of enforcing penalties 
or bounties from labor to support an income aristocratic 
monopoly of American natural resources, whose pecuni- 
ary interest is to spend that income in Europe. It has 
pledged its power to the establishment of landlord mo- 
nopolies, in violation of Federal rights of and to tax 
American labor only. The industrial citizenship of the 
several States can have no liberties under this declara- 
tion of party platform. National rights of the States 
that were to be protected by the contract of the Federal 
relation, are to be superceded by the power of this party 
platform made the constitution of a new government. 
The protection of the written Federal constitution is to 
be set aside. Some are trying to overturn the govern- 
ment by force, rather than monopoly political power — 
by the aid of co-operative political organization for that 
purpose. Labor can under such a political platform of 
principles above referred to never possibly have major- 
ity representation. It declares practically thereby that 
monopolies shall preside and have the casting vote. 



212 

Is then American labor better off in fact than its Brit- 
ish peers r In these United States of America, is lib- 
erty to labor and produce wealth for itself not a myth ? 

What a fearful state of things exists in the Argentine 
Eepublic, having a population of about one-half of New 
York State, yet a public debt of about $900,000,000, be- 
sides untold private debts ! Although this government 
has adopted the Federal constitution of the United 
States of America for her constitution, yet she is not 
ruled by it, but by financial monopolies under European 
control. All the income of profits or capital produced 
by her industry is therefore transferred to Europe. Her 
richest income people live there. Her labor toils for 
them. There is no imperialism in Europe, but has its 
balances from the fact that income is largely spent at 
home, which makes its oppression less. The industry of 
the Argentine Republic must ever be of the most de- 
graded kind, a crude hand-labor, non-consuming kind, 
until there is a reform in public policy to better protect 
it in the value of the products of its labor. 

It is to be feared the Republic of Brazil with its gi- 
gantic bank monopoly corporations, will follow in the 
same track, and her industry be worse off than under 
previous, milder imperialism — making the future cost of 
coffee to North American consumers to be higher, be- 
cause of penalties in cost of production exacted to sup- 
port European income aristocracy. North American 
industry is now contributing in this way to the support 
of South American aristocracy living in Europe. The 
republics of all the Americas have had too many bad 
precedents derived from their senior sister, the United 
States of America, in violation of her Anglo-Saxon, lib- 



213 

€rty-proclaiming constitution, in aid of monopoly ag- 
grandizement at expense of unrequited toil. How can 
the Monroe doctrine reach such political aggTession of 
. European power of debt, when American rule is traitor 
to the freedom of its labor ? 

The Argentine Eepublic has a remedy without revolu- 
tion or repudiation, by making gold coin her legal-tender 
unit of measure of value of all her wealth, granting no 
bank power of issue, her tariff not for revenue at all, but 
wholly protective of production, rather than of monop- 
oly and taxation ; and then by funding her public debt 
into two per cent, legal-tender greenbacks. This would 
enable her to pay her debt by wealth of her own pro- 
duction, providing, however, only enough for the first 
few years of revenue by an assessment on her railroad 
receipts, to pay the interest on her greenbacks, and es- 
tabhsh after a few years a sinking fund. This would 
make her labor to be both a manufacturing and foreign 
commerce industry, owning her own ships, and enable 
Argentine labor to own its own greenbacks as income 
investments, making all its industrial results co-opera- 
tive, spending its income patronizing its own instead of 
foreign wealth, because its own products would be so 
good and cheap. This would make her labor free. 

So long as there are territories of unoccupied land in 
North and South America, Africa and the South Seas, 
competition of natural resources will divert labor and 
prevent monopolies getting as much of labor's wealth in 
bounties. 

At what unnecessary sacrifice of home ! Treading 
under foot love of country ! All that is dear ! At what 
cost has Mammon put industry to ! Breaking the bonds 



214 

of the family relation ! Forcing expatriation to secure 
natural rights, rather than obtain them by revolution in 
old countries. 

Eevolution, it is feared, is looked on as the only rem- 
edy there, since labor has no constitutional protection 
as a political factor, it having a minority representation 
only, against the invested combined power of imperial- 
ism in form of monopoly. 

In Europe, the best present reliance of labor, is its 
monarchial establishment against its nobility and com- 
mercial monopolies. Competing monopolies for power 
may, under the name of republics, aim to destroy mon- 
archies, in order to better secure their power of robbing 
industry of its profits, as against each other. France is 
an example of this. Labor has no protection in France. 
In fact the wars of Europe have as their fundamental 
motive, the power of monopolies contending against each 
other for the power to rule over certain territories and 
compel the labor of those territories to yield up all the 
wealth it produces for their support, it getting only bare 
subsistence. 

The present American condition of labor is, a gradual 
lapsing to one of helpless dependence — the economy of 
want, such as now exists in Europe. There is no good 
reason whatever for it not being prosperous in propor- 
tion to its intelligence. Once restored to its political 
rights, co-operative, material prosperity is an easy thing 
to effect for all deserving it. The present conditions are 
unlawfully strained . Simply to restore the natural rights 
of wealth to its own free trade under the Federal rela- 
tion, becomes the liberty of American industry to secure 
for labor full value in exchange. 



215 

This free trade means good profits or capital to pro- 
ducers, if not speculators or monopolists. There can be 
no other condition protecting in permanently good 
wages, as a possession and heritage, to be handed down 
to coming generations of industrial American people. 

The present condition of American producers is, a 
political state of dry rot, always on the verge of want, 
requiring more hours of labor for the production of 
wealth, than the Federal laws provide shall be required, 
because it must labor to furnish enough for income 
people, as the first claim on all American wealth. 

Then where is the dignity and freedom of American 
labor ? How can the " chink " we are all after free its 
producers from overwork, and degradation below the 
Christian standard of development, and preserve vigor of 
body and mind to its producers ? 

" Bringing into use competing natural resources from 
abroad, will enable it to accumulate more to itself than 
British monopoly can to itself, by the free trade and 
saving in the cost of American raw materials. It will 
own its own profits as capital, to open up other domes- 
tic natural resources, if any raw materials are held too 
high for their free trade. It will then not be embargoed 
— from building its ships with which to do its own for- 
eign commerce — by bounty charges for coal, iron, cop- 
per, lead, lumber, farm products, and carrying charges. 



MONEY. 

The legal-tender, gold, unit of measure of the value of 
all other wealth, also its co-ordinate, par- value, legal- 
tender greenbacks, are the imperial rights of American 
labor, together with tariff restrictions subject only to 
American institutions. These alone will cause all Amer- 
ican labor to have full political protection. This will 
enable it to hold all it produces, relieved from support 
of income classes to rule over it. 

American institutions, unviolated, protect the labor of 
all the States alike, in all its varieties, from being as- 
saulted or oppressed by any and all conditions that rob 
it of its wealth — its natural distribution, recognizing 
slavery no more as a pre-existing condition of sovereign 
States or nationalities. 

The ownership of wealth by American labor will en- 
able it to keep out of debt. It can thereby dispense 
with the need of monopoly credit for currency, and 
measure of the value of its labor, although free to use 
commercial credit for exchange. It can then determine 
the value of the products of its labor for itself. The 
baser cannot drive out the better currency, in this polit- 
ically free condition, and thereby rob American labor of 
the value of its products, in their exchange. 

The people must recognize greenbacks as their own 
contracts for value received and sustain them in their 
value equal to gold, as purchasing currency. Values 
must not be inflated during their currency, by legislation 
favoring monopolies. 



217 

Greenbacks are evidences of constructive possession 
of money held in trust bj the government for use of 
bearer, at his own option. The people not making this 
option a reality, by providing their political agent — the 
government — the funds, there should be no restrictions 
on American labor in the free use of raw materials, 
so that adequate production will absorb all issued, in 
■exchange for it, for only value received. 

The fundamental cause of inflation of values during 
the currency of greenbacks following the late civil war 
was, because tariff restrictions were wholly in favor of 
landlord monopolies of American sources of wealth, the 
tariff being for revenue out of the profits of American 
labor. There became by the issue of greenbacks, a 
sudden demand by American labor for raw materials to 
produce the wealth that would acquire these greenbacks, 
because of their value as wealth, and to be used as cur- 
rency. American labor needed free-trade raw materials, 
to not have these greenbacks cost it more labor than 
they were worth, by having to earn support for income 
classes, before earning the cost of greenbacks. It did 
not want the government, after their issue, to force it to 
produce enough wealth to support an income class as 
the penalty of owning its own greenbacks. The party 
in power not only made these penalties by its tariffs, but 
incidentally deprived the people thereby of the use of 
them as free, legal-tender value money. 

It then cancelled them, and made other contracts in 
lieu of them, by which funding into government bonds, 
the people had to pay interest on them, without having 
their use, as currency, and then were obliged to pay in- 
terest also for the use of the national bank notes for 



218 

money currency, their gold money being needed to pay 
foreign debts. 

Landlord monopolists said to American labor, we have 
got the Federal government to back us up in charging 
you penalties, if you undertake to get any of these green- 
backs, to the extent of tariff restrictions, more or less, 
in the ratio these exist. Your American labor shall not 
freely earn wealth and with it buy them. We, landlord 
monopolists, have put up a job on you who fought or 
worked to defend the government, and have furnished 
by your labor, the materials to uphold the government 
made for the protection of your liberties, and have taken 
these greenbacks for pay. We will get as high a tariff^ 
as possible for revenue out of the profits of your labor^ 
during the whirl of patriotism in supporting the credit 
of the government, in addition to taking its greenbacks 
in payment for its immediate necessities. This will 
make American labor poorer, so it will have to sell its- 
greenbacks to live on, or rather its poverty will destroy 
the natural market for them — the home market. While 
greenbacks are so depressed in value, we — monopolists 
— keeping up a high tariff on American labor's necessi- 
ties, will ask a correspondingly high price for our raw 
materials, and thereby absorb the wealth of American 
labor at less than its value, by the prices of the raw ma- 
terials that are its absolute necessities. The greenbacks 
we get for tariff-protected bounties shall in fact cost us 
no labor — shall be premiums for paying successful Pres- 
idential campaign expenses. We will be masters of the 
situation forever after, if we can keep up a tariff for 
revenue only, incidentally thus protecting our landlord 
monopolies, and taxing labor to support the government^ 



219 

keeping the negro labor — the balance of power — so poor^ 
it will be the venal vote. American labor shall pay us 
all its profits as bounties for our tariff-protected, raw- 
material necessities. 

After these greenbacks are all thus secured from poor, 
degraded, toiling, servile, late returned from the war, but 
always patriotic and loyal industry — even including the 
negro — for absolutely nothing but free bounties exacted 
by the government from American labor, for doing noth- 
ing except keeping the present party in power ; then 
use this party to fund them into interest-bearing bonds, 
leaving American labor without currency, or any means 
resulting from industry, to determine the value it shall 
have for its products. Next secure monopoly national 
bank currency of credit, without requiring the duty to 
have that credit possess any reliable value in the hands 
of industry, there being no obligation to redeem it, ex- 
cept in something as redundant and unavailable^ for 
labor. 

It was conditions like these that caused California 
gold to be depreciated below its natural value. The 
people being in debt on account of tariff restrictions that 
only taxed their wealth and protected American landlord 
monopolies, were compelled to use credit of their cred- 
itor for currency. Gold then became merchandise and 
had only value as there was arbitrary demand for it for 
speculation, like any other product. After being ac- 
quired by speculation, values were inflated on consum- 
ers. It was not its abundance, as some suppose, that 
made it go down in value. American abundance of gold 
or wheat does not cause either to have less value. Their 
abundance would only create more demand for labor, if 



220 

its conditions were free. Tariff restrictions protect mo- 
nopolies in depreciating tlieir value, so tliat they can 
then acquire them, because of the poverty of labor that 
these restrictions produces, so it cannot hold them for 
Talue, or its federation of co-laborers earn the wealth to 
buy them. 

To prevent greenbacks losing value to individual hold- 
ers as money, they should draw interest and be legal 
tender as the condition of their issue, and be the only 
form of government bonds. Greenbacks would then be 
held for income, if other wealth became inflated above 
the value that gold makes for them. 

Assuming the aggregate free trade, use of capital pro- 
duces a natural net increase of two per cent, per annum, 
this might be the proper standard of interest that all 
greenbacks should bear from time of issue. 

No injury need come of this, because the government, 
having the option, could retire them at any time if it 
paid the public better to do so. It certainly would, after 
it redeemed its outstanding debt to monopolies, which 
being legal by American labor's own vote, should be 
paid according to the terms of the people's political con- 
tract — debts owed in Europe as well, it paying dearly, 
however, for the experience, that will teach it the duties 
of self-government hereafter. 

Legal tender money of gold and silver, gold to be the 
standard of value, and silver the subdivision of the law- 
ful standard of measure, and the co-ordinate currency 
of greenbacks, are a part of the fundamental law of 
American institutions, although they are not recognized 
as such by partisanship favoring private interests, which 
causes bad precedents to be thought part of the funda- 



221 

mental law. Because the dicta and judgments of the 
courts violate the principles and spirit of the law, it is 
the duty of American labor to so have its case represent- 
ed that all such precedents be reversed. 

Greenbacks have full legal tender value, if fundamental 
law for protection of the rights of American labor be 
not violated. They, if permitted by abolishment of mo- 
nopolies, would be currency and carry actual free trade 
value, and prevent depreciation in the value of all other 
American wealth. They carry as full, natural, mutual 
exchange, as much so as barter in kind, and are a me- 
dium without a gap or depression from the level of par 
value, in their inter-charge. American labor must be 
protected in its labor, while working to secure legal ten- 
der, by securing the profits of its wealth, to be able to 
own them. 

By the office legal tender, national wealth selected to 
be used as such, becomes the unit or standard of mea- 
sure of the value of all other American wealth. A con- 
ception thereby of all other values, in their relation to 
it and of foreign exchange, can be had by knowing the 
value of the product used for money, by its weight or 
measure as a commodity, but only if labor is free. Gold 
weighed and stamped is the product used for Federal 
money by all the States or nationalities of the federation 
under its contract of the Federal relation. Silver coin 
isi equally money, but not as a legal tender, and there- 
fore unit of measure. Gold is by the constitution, con- 
strued as the money standard of international exchange, 
it being then the existing commercial commodity used 
for this purpose. Silver is coined by the most tree na- 
tions for subsidary money — not as the unit of measure 



222 

of values of other products. This is the evident inten- 
tion of the founders of the Constitution. Any other 
construction is made in the interests of monopolies at 
cost of public interests. 

There will, however, be no need of bi-metalic currency, 
from any scarcity of gold coin, if monopolies are frozen 
out by the life and heat of American industry, its free 
production being protected. Servile labor will possess 
no money, no matter how much gold and silver are pro- 
duced. All will be converted to merchandise to pay 
debts and it will use a baser currency — that of credit — 
in the ratio of its obligations. 

By enforcement of the constitution, for the protection 
of free trade in American wealth, the supply of legal 
tender of gold, will naturally and inevitably be in pro- 
portion to the great variety of American wealth, to secure 
thereby the greatest benefits. It will be produced to 
cheapen the cost of exchanging, with no fear of loss of 
wealth to labor. This condition will prevent its being 
in such abundance as to inflate prices of other products, 
for as soon as these held any higher, in relative value 
with foreign exchange, money ^^ill be sent abroad as 
foreign trade merchandise to profit by its sale, and be 
absorbed into plate and other uses. 

The reason of inflation of prices with the influx of 
California gold was landlordism of the world including 
America — that is, by the tax on labor by landlordism 
there was no free trade market for sale of it. The 
American market would not absorb it. Monopolies 
had no use for it, so American labor could get only poor 
wages. It must pay out all its profits for bounties. 
Monopoly considered California gold as its own plunder 



223 

and finally got it — the power of the Federal government 
for oppression of American labor by tariffs for revenue was 
the means provided for monopolies to use. It was will- 
ing to give labor a bare subsistence for getting that gold, 
but not more. Labor got no more than if it produced 
corn. It is true, all its value was not sw^allowed by the 
first exchange, but the labor producing it received only 
products that were subject to bounty charges in every 
exchange, so it became only a matter of time, that it was 
no better off than if the wealth of gold had never been 
produced by it. It did not co-operate to benefit any 
other labor, which is still in the same poor condition. 

There being a scarcity of other products in hands of 
poor American labor, prices went up, for benefit of land- 
lords only, this depreciating the natural and federal- 
right purchasing power of labor's product of gold, snch 
as it would have had in a federally-protected free trade 
market; which would have provided an abundance of 
other wealth at home, for the demand this gold created. 

Tariff restriction prevented sufficient production for 
free trade to acquire California gold at full value. 
This also prevented American labor from going abroad 
and exchanging gold for such foreign products as would 
enable its producers to get full value, by a f'eir compe- 
tition in free trade, and with the importation of the 
wealth acquired, make their product a portion of Amer- 
ican industrial wealth. 

Tariff for revenue forced labor to take less for gold, 
of monopolized American wealth by parting with it to 
American monopolists,there being no other sale or mar- 
ket. Monopolists would then either spend it in Europe 
for living, or else lend to American industry. 



224 

When gold would have permanently added to the 
wealth of American industry, and made it free from the 
perpetual debt of usury, tariff legislation interposing, 
took away all American free trade protection, and ab^ 
sorbed it into the hands of monopolists at home and 
abroad. 

Then, as now, and ever has been from time immemo- 
rial, by human oppression, the more there has been pro~ 
duced of gold, the greater the accumulations of wealth 
into few hands, and individual industry has to work 
even harder, than if there were no reserves of wealth, 
because universally monopoly and oppressions have 
prevailed. The more wealth and magnificence labor 
has produced for monopoly, the more cruelly it has been 
oppressed. The discovery of new worlds of undeveloped 
wealth has for the time extended relief to those occupy- 
ing for relief from oppression. 

California gold-influx caused a demand for wealth that 
American co-operative labor would have found benefi- 
cial for sale of its products in buying this gold, but for 
such a policy as exists to-day, that of incidentally pro- 
tecting American landlord monopolies by a tariff ^for 
revenue out of American foreign trade. With all this, 
demand for labor, the government said it should not be 
free to use raw materials to make wealth for itself, but 
must labor only to serve monopolies which would set an 
arbitrary value on gold and their products. When labor 
had a chance to elevate itself, the government ruled by 
anti-Federal, anti-co-operative party policy, said it must 
not presume to be as free as our forefathers provided 
the Federal government to protect it in. 

This made the producers of Tt^lifornia gold, mere toil- 



225 

ers for a living, not accumulators of wealth. Plenty of 
gold diti not make American labor richer. It only made 
monopolists richer and American labor more servile ; 
illustrating that when a part of American natural re- 
sources most in demand are a monopoly, the condi- 
tion causes all the wealth to pass into fewer hands. 
The more there is produced, the more they absorb ; the 
more therefore is labor servile. 

The farmer's wool, wheat, cotton, &c., bring him no 
profits, any more than gold and silver do. The profits, 
of these fall into monopoly's hands and when returned 
to the labor producing them, in the form of manufac- 
tures, are so costly that it cannot buy what it really 
needs of them. 

This gold largely migrated, therefore, to where it was 
worth more than in America, only because of less land- 
lord monopolies, and remained abroad. It was lost to 
America forever, and what was acquired in exchange for 
it remained abroad, because less taxed in its exchange 
for subsistence. If any is loaned back to taxed American 
industry on usury, this usury goes to Europe as income, 
to be spent by an income class there. 

California in her golden age was therefore robbed of 
her golden opportunity for building up a grand Ameri- 
can co-operative. Occidental empire of her own wealth, 
in political alliance with a co-operative Oriental Ameri- 
can empire of wealth — out of debt — a free-trade empire 
— that is, with no bonds of debt to contract its wealth in 
the ownership of American labor. These empires of 
American labor are devastated of their wealth, because 
ruled over by monopolists. California had an abundance 
of wealth in the value of her gold with which >. develop 
15 



226 

her natural resources, if the Federal relation had not 
deprived her of its natural market to favor private in. 
terests. She is now in want of it, paying interest there- 
for, although for no wrong she had done, rather for 
obeying the great law of labor that is the foundation of 
Christian ethics. That is, American labor shall be op- 
pressed and trodden under foot by the foul anti-Christ 
monopoly — because it performs the great duty of at- 
tempting to Christianize itself, not by degrading toil for 
others, but by the labor that has its inuigorating periods 
of rest, or Sabbath, for the blessings it brings its family. 
This policy says American labor must do service only to 
monopoly, and therefore have no provision for family 
rest or Sabbath. Be bred for toil only, without the fam- 
ily relation — like brutes. 

California is now toiling to produce wealth to fill her 
contracts of usury. The violation of the Federal rela- 
tion forces her to support a foreign income aristocracy 
by the interest she toils to produce ; the sweat oozing 
from her fair, sun-burned brow, once shaded with the 
golden ringlets of her virgin beauty. These have been 
ruthlessly shorn to deck the harlot — monopoly — an alien 
to the family — not a blood relation — an adventuress im- 
ported by the party of monopoly, in power. By insur- 
gent exercise of imperial power over the Federal rela- 
tion, poor, weeping California is made a bond servant, 
wasting her beauty in slavery, to provide the dainties 
that are served at the front, where her fair form cannot 
appear, because denuded of the natural adornments cf 
her beauty. The party in power — the black eunuch of 
monopoly — has done the behests of its master, binding 
her to this perpetual servitude, denying her the shield 



227 

of the protection every State has committed to the 
charge of the Federal government for this use. Every 
pound of wheat, raisins and gold costs her far too much. 

A people not developed enough to bring all their 
wealth under co-operative, equal relations, protecting 
every laborer from charges on his wealth or capital of 
penalties for private interests whereby there is not an 
equality of human right, but will without resentment see 
labor wronged in use of its means of wealth, to provide 
for the Christian family relation, will not have spirit 
enough to improve the currency value of products of 
any kind, or of credit to represent their currency value, 
by any arbitrary conditions imposed upon it. For ex- 
ample, a war against national banks. The war should 
be against conditions that force an industry into debt, 
calling for arbitrary credit to be used for money cur- 
rency. 

The great and only remedy for improving credit cur- 
rency is to make labor more wealthy by removing tariff 
restrictions from free trade in its own wealth, to en- 
able it to get out of debt, by getting more value for 
its products, and thus be able to use the legal tender of 
gold our forefathers most wisely provided as the only 
unit of measure of value. Bank note currency, and 
every form of commercial credit, but without monopoly 
powers, can and will then aid the production of wealth 
for American labor. 

Where the rights of American labor are protected, 
neither fiat, nor the various forms of government mo- 
nopoly credit currency, can compete with present legal 
tender, as the unit of measure of values. 

However, a legal-tender note, issued by the govern- 



228 

ment needing the use of credit, made under conditions 
that do not depreciate the value of other wages, by not 
being issued without value received, payable at option 
of the government, with the contract of annual interest 
until paid, would 6o-operate with Jegal-tender coin, and 
take its place, if bullion became more profitable for ex- 
port as merchandise than other products. 

Greenbacks, under a protective tariff of labor only, 
will have the preference of coin, so long as there are 
foreign Federal debts to pay. 

It evidently was intended that coining was to be done, 
by the government, for any American laborer who mined 
bullion or produced it by foreign commerce in a free 
trade exchange of his own wealth, to thereby enable him 
to conform to his privilege, political right or preroga- 
tive, to make it a legal tender in such a quantity that it 
established itself as a unit of measure, agreeing with the 
par of international exchange, and discharge debts 
without cost of depreciation of his wealth, the creditor 
being protected in like manner from being obliged to 
take any currency not of legal tender value, or of less 
value than gold. 

The constitution evidently recognizes money to be 
wealth in the hands of citizens, its duty being simply to 
declare its worth, by weighing and stamping ii It could 
never have been intended that the government should 
buy and absorb the fcuUion in limited amounts, and 
make the coin for sale, because then the speculator could 
control it, and fluctuate values, as the Bank of England 
can do. If labor has an outstanding contract payable 
in legal tender., it has a right to mine or otherwise pro- 
cure the bullion and have this money weighed and 



229 

stamped. The practice of the government buying the 
bullion in the market and coining for sale restricts fi-ee 
trade in American wealth. American labor should have 
all the gold it earned and have it stamped for himself to 
get its money currency value. There is then no danger 
of a glut, because if other values were marked up, it 
would be retired from use as money ; the tariff, however, 
not being for revenue only, but protection only. 

Grold and silver are to be used as money only at their 
labor value, determined by the customs of merchants 
that are free and equal between themselves, and from 
charges by civil governments. It does not require each 
payment to be weighed out for tender. The constitu- 
tion requires that Congress shall weigh it, putting on a 
stamp to denominate its weight, giving a name to ea^h 
coin, bar or ingot, and a tender of this, or its equivalent 
certificate of deposit, is made absolute proof of com- 
pliance with contract for payment of a determinable 
value. 

It is a certainty of American political science — al- 
though the false teachings of monopoly have intervened 
to corrupt its virtue and purity — that the Federal citi- 
zen has the right attaching to citizenship which cannot 
be disposed of, without a disposition of the government 
itself, to make gold and silver coin a legal tender, and 
gold valuation to be the unit of measure of all products, 
including silver, and free trade to take his own produc- 
tions and exchange for the ore or bullion wherewith to 
have coined into this money, wherever he can find it, to 
prevent thereby its costing more than it is worth, be it 
either among American natural resources or from abroad, 
rather than submit to overcharges of monopolies of 



230 

American improvements on mining resources, to pro- 
duce bullion therefrom. 

It was never intended bj the sources of American po- 
litical power — its own labor — that there should be a 
corner in the improvements upon the American sources 
of gold, any more than there was on the sources of other 
minerals, water, and products of the soil, nor sources of 
wealth used for transportation, like railroad easements. 

It is by this means that protection is assured to every 
citizen, in settling his domestic and foreign exchanges, 
against depreciation in the value of the wealth he pro- 
duces. In other words, American politicial science 
teaches — when freed from monopoly manipulation — that 
the American laborer, no matter how humble, has a right 
to invoke the power of his government to protect him 
from being compelled to submit to the cost of barter, 
and also to over and unequal taxation of his wealth by 
suffering what debt entailed by law upon American in- 
dustry involves, that of being compelled to use credit, 
paying interest therefor, instead of his own paid-for 
legal tender for currency, through monopoly j)revention 
of his free trade, by which he is compelled to take less 
than real value for the products of his labor that some 
monopoly favored by political partisanship shall have 
gratuities by this robbery. 

It is an impairment of the political contract of Amer- 
ican labor with its government if there is not a free trade 
use of its wealth, to obtain the requisite legal money for 
the citizen to protect himself in his family rights — a de- 
struction of the national rights of States, so governed — 
a loss of national freedom by such entangling alliances. 

If one producer does not make as intelligent use of 



231 

this right as another and acquires less wealth by free 
trade, this is an effect that no civil law can alter. But 
what is the benefit of great individual wealth, if all labor 
be co-operative ? An equality of right, does not imply 
an agrarian distribution of wealth, but the reverse. It 
only implies complete protection to those who acquire 
it to have free individual use, ^Yith no invasion of those 
rights, either by agrarian powers on the one hand, or 
monopoly power for distribution of wealth on the other. 
Both of these are anarchial, in that they tend to destroy 
the office of civil government in its power for equal pro- 
tection of all wealth alike, to facilitate co-operation of 
labor. 

These conditions of equality must be maintained by 
preventing arbitrary or fiat, money variation of values of 
wealth, by which its producers must suffer, for specu- 
lative purposes. Speculation is, however, a natural 
right, if confined to contracts between individuals, with 
no political power exercised officially to establish mo- 
nopolies. 

The great justice to the rights of American labor to- 
day, in having all public debts to be funded only into 
greenbacks, to be recognized as legal tender, is to 
quicker restore the equilibrium of foreign exchange. 

American industry's political condition of free trade 
is such that it will make the money of the constitution 
pre-eminent over all other forms of money currency of 
the globe, and its immigration for homestead to tins 
land of liberty — this great federation of sovereign United 
States or nation's industries, for protection of natural 
rights of labor of all by one imperial power. It will 
make this constitutional money of gold and silver coin 



232 

to be more valuable than any form of money currency 
of Europe, for exchange of all the products of all neutral 
nations. Its free trade power will transfer the wealth of 
the globe from Europe to America, showing European 
industries — in fact the labor of the world — the way to 
gain the rights due to them. 

This is the only condition that will make America the 
centre of foreign exchange, with New York as the world's 
emporium of wealth ; because the currency of gold and 
silver never depreciates the value of other wealth. It 
will therefore be the most valuable to American com- 
merce as the unit of values, and for the labor of all 
nations to use as the medium of their exchanges. It will 
be the great motive for all nations having natural ex- 
ehanges, to offer them, taking American coin at par with 
other products, making it the unit of measure of their 
values, well knowing it will buy them American w^ealth 
of full value. 



SILVER. 

There is a popular belief that the government can 
make the money market easy, through buying silver 
bullion, coining and offering it for sale. Monopoly in- 
terests, taking advantage of this fact, ask the govern- 
ment to do it, aiming to speculate at expense of public 
interests. 

Silver in fact is not protected in its real profit, but is 
sold on account of ch.arges on it, at below Federal rela- 
tion and natural value. If there was free trade for it — 
from all penalties in cost of production — there would be 
no more silver produced than would realize good profits. 
Those producing it would not be obliged to be without 
demand, not being restricted in finding other good em- 
ployment. The labor market being free, can buy raw 
material having no bounties on them, and simply apply 
itself to the product of other wealth in better demand, 
which would make them good wages. It cannot do this 
under monopoly conditions. 

There appears to be no complaint among a majority 
of producers of silver about the extra cost of its produc- 
tions, on account of tariff restrictions for revenue, for 
which its production is over and unequally charged. 
Their policy is — to agree to let other monopolies — those 
of other natural resources — tax the public interests by 
means of this form of tariff restrictions. 

Advocates of governmental control and distribution of 
wealth by means of a tariff' for revenue out of American 
labor only, aim to compel the people, through the 



234 

agency of the government, to buy this silver at its en- 
hanced cost of production, whereby other landlord mo- 
nopolies have gotten their wealth. They do not object 
to this charge, if the government will throw its cost on 
other American labor, as a pure penalty charged up in 
enhanced price of subsistence. 

Rather than be out of the system of monopoly protec- 
tion of wool, iron, coal, lumber, &c., it wants its chance 
to tax American industry's wealth, in its own way. 

It agrees that these shall have their monopoly privi- 
leges by means of tariff restrictions, which it cannot 
have, because silver can be so easily smuggled ; but ex- 
pects for helping to make the present party power, that 
the government Avill absorb silver into its vaults as its 
public property, which the public has no use for at its 
present cost of production. 

The office of the government, as the agent of American 
labor, is only to protect its interests, not accumulate 
wealth, not deal in it, although this wealth is money. 
Silver bought at an enhanced price and cost of produc-^ 
tion — of enough to cover the profits of landlord monop- 
olies — is intended to be issued as fiat, government money ; 
instead of the government adopting the standard of the 
unit of measure between nations, whose labor is free 
enough to have a free trade among neutral nations — 
more than enough to make only its own foreign ex- 
changes, like France. 

This silver can have only its natural market as money, 
having commodity value, so long as gold is the standard 
unit of measure of all other values. The policy of any 
silver coinage act is — under monopoly control — to com- 
pel the government to buy and hold all possible, as a 



235 

goveruroent monopoly, out of the market, while a market 
is being made for the balance, that will only destroy the 
value of that which the government has bought — when 
it desires to realize and get out of all possible debt — by 
which the people mnst be heavy losers at that time 
under the present government control of the production 
of American wealth. 

Already the government has a stock of silver coin on 
hand, for sale at fiat value — the value of gold for what 
has actually cost less. It therefore finds it unsaleable, 
the legal tender fiat of the government not endorsing it. 
There is no profit to American industry thereby, but 
the value of all its wealth is lowered by the government 
holding any gold or silver as a deposit — without demand 
or use, that should pay public debt's. It causes the lien 
for debt on American wealth, for interest on the increaseel 
public debt for money so held. 

When American industry clamors for more money, 
because it is hard pressed for credit to carry its debt 
with, no amount of money held as assets by the govern- 
ment is of any use. American industry is too poor, 
therefore cannot buy that money, having nothing to buy 
it with. It can have no profitable use for it, but it de- 
prives itself of that much wealth, that could be applied 
on account of its public and private debts, and stop the 
perpetual debt of interest to that extent, now accruing. 

The influx of California gold did not alleviate this 
condition. No amount would, so long as American 
wealth is taxed in penalties — not protected from sucb 
charges. 

There cannot be a bi-metal legal-tender money estab- 
lished, without taxing all the fluctuations of the market 



236 

value of bullion, comprising this money, out of the value 
of all other wealth, within its jurisdiction, from Ameri- 
can labor only, into the hands of monopolies. At best, 
gold must be the standard of value to be adopted as the 
unit of measure of the value of all other wealth, includ- 
ing silver, although silver may be equally the money of 
the constitution as well as of nations. Gold in fact will 
be the actual money, for iinit of measure in making for- 
eign exchanges, if silver should be made legal tender, 
which w^ould be then used, only within its legal tender 
jurisdiction. It would then be the unit of measure, of 
values of all other wealth, making a nominal local stand- 
ard of values, but gold would be the actual money used 
for settlements of international exchanges. 

Our forefathers did wisely, for securing to American 
industry the highest value for its products, against de- 
preciation, by making the controlling unit of measure of 
all international exchange among merchants, the legal 
tender for all amounts, to be gold, without putting any 
fiat value on it. This will make silver no less money. 
It will be subsidiary, only as it is more costly to handle 
and is not a unit of measure of values. 

To have a bi-metal legal tender for all values, would 
be simply to permit every one producing gold and silver, 
to have them coined, and a forced issse be made on the 
people, as fiat money — without endorsement. Popular 
beliefs — that gold and silver can be legal tender for 
any amount — are by those who think it is the duty of 
the government's office to buy limited amounts of 
bullion and coin it, determining how much is needed tor 
currency. The precedents of the government favor this 
course, but they favor also the taxation of the profits of 



237 

labor. Both are false in principle. Without doubt, all' 
trade should be free for the gain of American labor. 
The office of the government is to coin all offered. 

The constitution makes no guarranty of value. It se- 
lects gold for legal tender, and stops. To amend the 
constitution and permit a system of bi-metal money,, 
co-ordinate in right of being legal tender, would convert 
the natural rights of the States, b}' an act of insergent 
revolution, to imperialism. It would put it into the 
power of monopoly to impair the obligation of contracts. 
It would establish a government involving no responsi- 
bility to the people for variation of values caused by its 
power. Such an one would not stand the friction of 
ages. 

The principles of Christianity are a sword, ever at: 
work destroying such governments, teaching nations 
which will heed its counsels, how laws should be made- 
that will be permanent, because protecting the natural 
rights of man — such as no civil government can impair, 
without sowing the seeds of its own destruction. Two 
units of measure, that are inherently variable in value 
cannot be a money establishing a uniform unit of mea- 
sure of value for all other wealth. 

What is needed, to cause silver to have all the pur- 
chasing value to American labor, the Federal relation 
provides, is to remove tariff restrictions from the free- 
trade in all American wealth, embracing silver in this 
protection as well as wool, cotton, &c., and using green- 
backs while the government is in debt, until they can be 
retired because the public interest demands it, to stop 
all public obligations from having force. It will cost so 
much less then to produce silver, that there will be a 



238 

better perpetual demand for it, beoiiuse of no fear of 
depreciation. 

Gold being required as the unit of measure of values 
of products, among the merchants between nations — if 
not among those too poor to have any, like China, India, 
Mexico and South America, the makers of the Federal 
Constitution could not reverse this order of things, with- 
out injuring American foreign free trade. They intend- 
ed imperial protection to American industry in that it 
should have full protection in its own foreign commerce, 
and not be classed among those nations so poor that 
silver and tokens would be their money bought cheap 
and sold dear for circulation. Gold being less weighty, 
other things being equal, makes it cheaper money, hence 
more profitable, but silver is none the less money at its 
real value. 

Silver, theli, must be subsidiary, so far as it is made 
legal tender, in such amounts only as will be subdivi- 
sions of the gold denominations, it then being fiat money 
with the government endorsement, the people by their 
government giving it the legal tender value, in small 
change, consequently its free trade, and standing any 
loss of value from its use. 

Silver, being also the money of nations as much as 
gold, it may be very advantageous to put the govern- 
ment stamp on bars of it, denoting its weight and there- 
by legal evidence of its commercial value, for all who 
offer it for this kind of coinage, and store it at public 
expense for benefit of its owners, issuing certificates of 
amounts so coined and deposited to cheapen its cost of 
exchange, to give it currency among all nations, and en- 



239 

liance thereby its purcliasing value, as a means of ac- 
quiring foreign wealth. 

This would in no event exercise an imperial preroga- 
tive over the States, not empowered by the contract of 
the Federal relation. Accepting it for custom or other 
government dues, would be an imperial act of the Fede- 
ral government; destroying the autonomy of the States. 

American institutions do not give any indorsement, as 
to the value of gold — by its currency, although it is 
made a legal tender, and the only standard of measure 
for all other values. It should not of silver, or accept 
it at a value it cannot compel the people to accept it at, 
thereby making itself a speculator in it, or the guarantor 
of the profit of a speculator in it. 



INTEEEST. 

The wealth produced by free trade use of capital — be- 
comes in the nature of profits of partnership for co-ope- 
ration of capital with labor — a definite, liquidated assess- 
ment of profits out of this co-operation agreed on as to- 
amount, under the name of interest or income. 

This is the natural fund from which interest accrues^ 
permitting lawful, justifiable, honorable, educated classes 
of co-operative income wealth — the correct political con- 
dition of the educated classes. This condition of free- 
dom, partnership and co-operation does not generate 
usury or penalties. It does no wrong to labor, but 
rather co-operates with it for mutual benefit. The profits 
are natural-surplus or accumulations, leaving better 
wages or more wealth, as the net product for benefit of 
labor than otherwise, elevating industry thereby. 

This is the condition only under full protection of labor,, 
as the constitution provides, where wealth is free from 
all liens of over and unequal taxation in the nature of 
penalties, so that in having the use of credit or capital, 
interest becomes in the nature of a partnership. Under 
these conditions, labor makes profits, by saving them in 
cost of living, making products for use and free trade 
with less labor. 

Under the unconstitutional use of official power making 
monopoly the only condition of exchange, — nominally 
interest, but really usury — becomes only in the nature 
of a charge of penalties on the production of wealth, for 
the support of an income aristocracy without equivalent 



241 

return. Wages are poor and cost of living is high there- 
under. 

Under this political status, capital must be borrowed 
only of monopolies, subjected to restricted conditions 
whereby labor gets no profits. Therefore wealth cannot 
be retained by producers, by a natural acquirement or 
distribution. The profits attaching to it after subsist- 
ence is taken out for labor's daily support becomes the 
capital of monopolies. This is not by co-operative, 
natural exchange, bul by mere force of law ; penalties 
being paid as pure tribute for means to labor. Wages 
must thereby be depreciated in their necessary exchange 
value to industry. Labor must thereby become poor. . 

These profits, as capital in monopolies hands, have 
power to charge for their use on the very industry pro- 
ducing them, usury or penalties. A fair division of 
profits to labor — such as would occur under fi*ee trade 
co-operation of labor and capital — is not made thereby. 
The excess is usury. Labor is deprived of all the ben- 
efits of co-operation that would enable it to produce 
wealth for itself, and be protected in producing it. 
There is no justification for revolution under American 
institutions for the wrong thus accomplished, because 
of trade restrictions taking all profits or capital from 
labor, then forcing it to borrow that capital for use, mak- 
ing the penalty a law-inflicted condition. American 
labor thus suffers from its own neglect of public duties. 
It must learn to protect the public interest and leave 
private interests to take care of themselves, which would 
save it from oppression. It must take drastic measures 
with any attempt by monopoly to pair off its vote with 
the venal vote. There would be a good deal of pallia- 
16 



242 

tion for any personal assault on a monopolist who would 
so wrong American labor in all its family relations as 
ordained by Creative law, by the political servility it is 
suffering under such conditions, if there were no preven- 
tion through the power provided,by American institutions. 
The American voter — as his great duty, must strive to 
educate his fellow voter who is responsible by his vote 
for any oppression of labor. Defying the law without 
reforming the voter will never relieve labor, which is in a 
large majority, and is able to defend American institu- 
tions, if it will unite for this imperial purpose. 

The present politico -industrial bondage of x4.merican 
wealth to a condition of perpetual debt, because Ameri- 
can labor is denied free trade, forces usury from this 
labor. This status is not the life of industry, protecting 
in equality of liberty, but is rather a penalty on, than a 
profit for, labor. 

There is any amount of credit, listed as capital or 
assets, willing to loan itself, even on the security of un- 
productive wealth, and rights of possession, having a 
value as natural monopolies, if the security is good for 
the credit loaned, together with the penalties of usury? 
that are contracted to accrue. There is very little labor 
that can pay all these penalties of taxation or bounties, 
growing out of the present tariff restrictions and other 
monopolies. 

It cannot make profits, equal to current charges for 
use, certainly for the use of capital not having its value 
determined by legal tender coin as its unit of measure, 
but of credit inflated in price or value because the pres- 
ent American credit currency has not the actual convert- 
ible value of the gold it nominally represents without a 
sacrifice of American wealth. 



243 

Good times are those in which labor can earn natural 
profits, because protected in securing full exchangable 
value to producers. Bad times are those in which labor 
cannot produce without being forced by laws to yield its 
profits to monopolies — to part with these profits as usu- 
ry to such monopolies. In good times the preference 
will be to invest capital or accumulated profits in co- 
operative business with labor, for the chances of profits 
— rather than loan them to draw toil-money, usury, anti- 
Christian money, oppression-money, labor-degradation 
money, as the only alternative, because the law forces 
capital otherwise to be idle. 

The fact that capitalists will not invest in business* 
but only loan money on its security for usury or penal- 
ties, is evidence of poor, hard times, in which it does 
not pay good profits for jDroducing wealth, and that in- 
dustry is hopelessly in debt, the borrowing being made 
necessary to stave off acts of insolvency, which must 
come periodically to those drawn into the current with- 
out support. 

This preference, either way, is the test of whether 
there are restrictions or not, laid on labor in the produc- 
tion of wealth. If of the former, credit will be in the 
market to loan on security — for the usury or penalties 
to accrue, for the establishment of purely monopoly in- 
come existence. If of the latter, capital will be invested 
in business for profits — if not loaned on a co-operative 
basis of profits — as being more profitable than interest 
or usury. The former condition is called hard times — 
hard for labor and easy for speculation to make profits. 
The latter good times, wiien wealth is produced that 
bears profits to the producer, industry paying better 
than monopoly. 



244 

In good times, every laborer is co-operative for self 
and mutual interest, and helps make profits for his fellow 
laborer. In bad times, one gains at cost or wrong of 
the other, who receives no equivalent, the successful 
scalping speculator being the monopolist; his fellow being 
poorer than the law of nature, and American institutions 
provide he shall be in proportion to his labor. 

The power, of protected private interests or monopo- 
lies, makes for the effect of a perpetual debt of usury, 
as a penalty only, because of inevitable debt, beyond 
the strength of industry, to resist the power of the gov- 
ernment brought to bear down on it, to avoid this debt. 
This usury comes only out of the production of wealth 
of American labor — a government-exacted revenue for 
the support of an aristocracy of monopolies — profits to 
industry for the use of borrowed wages or capital, not 
being their natural amount, not enough to pay the pen- 
alties exacted and leave lawful free trade wealth to in- 
dustry, but only the wages of daily subsistence of de- 
graded, servile toil. 

Interest thereunder becomes pure, oppressive toil to 
procure penalties. Wealth thus becomes more and more 
a monopoly, used to draw income from the manual pro- 
ducers of manufactures, houses, railroads, &c., that have 
no raw materials of their own, or any monopolies from 
which to obtain them. 

If the American labor's capital be free from aU une- 
qual conditions of protection of rights that involve de- 
preciation of its value, the loaning of it for a part of the 
wealth produced by its labor-saving use, as a reward, 
implying a partnership of profits, agreed on in an amount 
caUed interest, is an agreement that involves no hard- 



245 

ships, but a public benefit, because of the facihties it 
offers for an increased production- for producers them- 
selves — not for monopolies of them. 

The contrast between American and Chinese industry, 
would be more apiDarent than it is, if the American was 
more politically free in its production of wealth. The 
American would be the richer and more intelhgent class. 
The latter is in any event, even with the privilege of free 
institutions, a prey to all forms of monopoly and op- 
pressions, a degraded, ignorant, heathen soul, with not 
light enough to admit the Christian truth, of the brother- 
hood of man, a subject of those superstitions that always 
afflict and darken a human soul, making its possessor 
incompetent as a class, for self-government — its wealth 
correspondingly low, itself too degraded to be able to 
use capital and pay interest thereon for the profits it 
could make, hence make no profits and have no capital. 

Why is not English capital loaning itself and taking- 
liens on Chinese wealth, rather than American, and avail 
itself of cheaper labor to make it ? Because it is less 
valuable in proportion to cost. There is too much cost 
of subsistence, too little surplus or profit. This is the 
reason^ — party rule at Washington, in favor of private 
interests, not prevailing — wh}^ American products would 
be the most valuable for foreign trade against all other 
competing products, and American industry the richest. 
They are so valuable, that it would be profitable to buy 
them at the highest prices, as more profits could be ob- 
tained- from the product of American than Chinese in- 
dustry by free trade. 

There being then no monopoly of wealth, the contract 
for interest is not a penalty, but a free trade co-opera- 



246 

tive production and distribution of wealth, without being 
a tax on production, but a premium on profits. This 
makes an option — without a sacrifice or depreciation in 
vahie — as to whether it will pay better to borrow capital 
on interest to be used by self employed labor in plant, 
&c., for the profit gained by the use of it, or else pro- 
duce capital by original, primitive labor, acquiring it by 
development, to be used in like manner by the owner. 
This option will break down monopoly terms of interest 
or cost of borrowing. Absolute protection by any govern- 
ment of the free trade of its own labor, therefore must 
dispense with all usury laws, governing the rates of in- 
terest, as being not only unnecessary and superfluous, 
but absolutely restrictive of labor in its industry to se- 
cure wealth. 

Wealth then, all being free from all penalties, will be 
so protected that it will suffer no penalties of deprecia- 
tion because of charges for usury, but make perpetual 
profits for both borrower and lender, rather than be in 
a political condition of perpetual debt entailed on the 
producer, only to support a purely income class, but not 
for the public interests. 

These oppressions prevent labor owning its own capi- 
tal, whieh under these political conditions is then loaned 
t>o it by monopolies, for those penalties called interest. 
Creating a government monopoly to issue and loan credit 
for currency in limited amounts, whether made a legal 
tender or not, protects the arbitrary expansion and con- 
traction of the current value of products, without being 
governed by the natural laws of supply and demand, in 
fact traverses those laws, politically so where the gov- 
ernment restricts the free trade of its own labor. Labor 



I 



247 • 

is thereby liable to so suffer by enhancement of those 
necessities it must purchase, and depreciation of those 
for which it must find a market, to enable it to perform 
its contracts, that it may find itself insolvent at any time, 
although actually producing enough wealth, which, under 
free trade conditions, would always keep it solvent. 
These conditions that result in unforseen insolvency are 
invariably caused by laws to favor private interests by 
taxing penalties out of public interests, making the in- 
dustrial community that much poorer, and an income 
class that much richer, by these sudden evolvements of 
values. 

The precedents of law decisions therefore by the 
courts of the land, that it is only optional with Congress 
to pass bankrupt laws, are flavored with traditionary 
ideas, that are as much at variance with the spirit of 
American institutions, as are tariffs for revenue, rather 
than protection and the coinage duties of the govern- 
ment and other precedents. In fact, monopoly being 
represented — rather than those rights that pertain to 
the protection of labor — the established Courts of Justice 
have not been fully informed by their law ofticers of the 
fundamental principles of American institutions that 
should be their guide. Individual against individual 
interest has been brought into court, instead of there 
being proper provision for the State to champion the 
rights it is bound to protect, by being a party on one 
side. 



FEDERAL BANKRUPT LAWS. 

There becomes an ever present necessity for remedial 
laws, growing out of inevitable results that must occur 
to some — of bankrupt or insolvency. These occur 
mostly under political conditions which force penalties 
out of profits of |labor, making its political condition 
that of earning but a bare existence. This condition 
has no justification under naturaMaw, nor under Ameri- 
can institutions, but is made in violation of them to suit 
the behests of monopolies ; by partisans in power whose 
defense of traditions and precedents, procured by cor- 
ruption, set at naught the spirit of the constitution and 
liberties secured by our forefathers. 

Bankrupt laws should exist to co-operate with and 
relieve industry from oppressions, that do not benefit, 
but onl}^ impede the operation of laws that preserve so- 
ciety — those laws that impede labor. Special suffering 
must come to some in a greater or less degree from the 
political exactions of over and unequal taxation of pure 
penalties on labor, which is a result of a policy of favor- 
ing private interests only — a policy derogatory of the 
commonwealth of industrial co-operation. This is a re- 
sult of constructing monopolies with special political 
power for oppressing American industry into a condi- 
tion of mere toil, verging on want, degrading labor's 
family relation and children by their heartless cruelties, 
in the broad Christian light of to-day. 

It is a political oppression, for one class of citizens — 
to whom society lets the portions of its own natural re- 
sources, which this class holds in trust only, for public 



249 

uses, to be handed down to coming generations — that 
such citizens be invested with special power to look 
down from their defences, of Federal tariff fortifications, 
neither using themselves, nor permitting others to use 
for a fair equivalent, the means necessary to maintain 
human life in the estate it was created to exist, and 
thereby absorb the wealth that labor produces, by means 
of bounties only, leaving it poor, and therefore creating 
an income-class, wealth-power, and secure, for that class, 
laws for the issuance of a monopoly credit for currency 
in limited amounts, the safety and profit of the issuer — 
not the public interests — being the criterion, with all 
these attendant conditions that produce insolvency. 

Such is the anti-Christian, cruel, inhuman result of 
imperial oppression of the policy the people has ap- 
pointed to absorb their wealth. It is pledged to eternal 
enmity against American labor. There can be no com- 
promise. Its total extinction is the absolute necessity 
for the preservation of American institutions — if they 
are to be republican in spirit as well as in form. Under 
such a policy, if a man loves his home, with its hills, 
valleys, waters and climate — if the shadows of the skies 
on the landscapes, and the breezes that have fanned and 
refreshed the face of his youth, have become dear to him 
from the associations of childhood — he can enjoy them 
only on condition of toiling to support a ruling class ; 
or, as selfish men with tyrannical anti-Christian spirit 
would say, if he does not like these things, he is at lib- 
erty to go to some other country. 

This, however, is not the law of Christian ethics, nor 
of American institutions. It is the cruel law of tyranny, 
that is beneath the spirit of American liberty. What 



250 

sliould cause the blood of American labor to boil with 
so much fierceness, as that the venal vote is provided bj 
the wealth he produced, to pair off with his vote, and 
make the result declare, that he cannot live under the 
American flag except as a toiler to support a ruling class, 
and then be told, that majorities and not constitutions 
and Creative power, rules, and he may go somewhere 
else ? He may if he does not like it, work his passage 
to join the Boers of South Africa in founding a republic 
of liberty. This is what the party in power says by its 
acts, but who that is an American freeman will not strike 
back in the face at such an exile lot ? 

Such cruel conditions are tolerated under British in- 
stitutions and have been transplanted to American soil. 
There has been some Providential relief afforded by 
forced emigration, to escape humau oppression. 

Sach political conditions cause labor, as a class, to be 
too poor, poorer than civil-law society should permit, to 
retain blessings of a Christian dispensation. They force 
to be poor, if one must labor to live. For that reason 
alone, Federal laws decree, labor shall have nothing. 
They force it to obtain the use of credit, paying usury 
therefor, because they force it to inevitable debt, in 
order to obtain the capital necessary for more econom- 
ical production. The law provides no compensation to 
American labor therefor. It must submit or perish. 
American landlordism bids fair to outdo the same class 
of oppression in Europe, as population increases. The 
power to make tariff restrictions and money monopolies 
is unlimited in the bad precedents prevailing, making 
thereby American landlord taxation unlimited. It buries 
the spirit of American institutions under the letter. 



251 

Some craven lackeys of oppression of American labor^ 
who are ready to bid everybody to migrate who does not 
like this state of things, while they are dressed in mo- 
nopoly-regulation outfit, are ready to say, what has all 
this got to do with bankrupt laws ? of which they are as 
ignorant of their purpose, as they are of the nature of 
personal liberty under American institutions established 
by our forefathers. Let us see further on. 

There is a barrier, although a very unreliable one 
under American institutions, against such oppressions. 
This is the vote of industry itself. It is not used with 
effect, hoAvever. Labor is still without adequate protec- 
tion. From past ages of oppressions, not having the 
responsibility of government in its hands, and not hav- 
ing learned from experience how to vote, it is yet incom- 
petent to perform the duties required of it for its own 
protection and self-government. It has been subject to 
divisions and oppressions too long, and has not learned 
the science of government, although learning fast and 
sure, as it becomes an educated class. 

British bankrupt laws prevailed to relieve certain 
classes only ; those more immediately affected by such 
conditions, which should not exist under American in- 
stitutions, to need any bankrupt law for relief ot only 
classes. 

Granting that these two conditions will not always 
exist, there is still a natural reason, why there should 
always be bankrupt laws in a society preserving capitab 
as store for society resting from labor and for econom- 
ical production, organized under the rule and protection 
of civil law. Their necessity arises to protect from vm- 
foreseen loss — from death, war, rapine, fire, water, tfec.,. 



252 

for which there is no adequate insurance business pro- 
yided. 

The political condition of over and unequal taxation 
of one class — industry — by penalties before it can have 
necessities, is always attended by unforeseen results, 
such as cause periodical insolvency to individuals, and 
even governments. The result of this is an increasing 
perpetual debt, culminating periodically in financial col- 
lapses. 

These conditions make it impossible to do other than 
a credit business. Having possession of wealth, it 
thereby becomes liable to unforeseen depreciation in 
value, and to being inconvertible to an amount that will 
prevent its oAvner getting into helpless debt, with sacri- 
fices too heavy for carrying on a solvent business. 

These conditions, among others like fire, flood, rapine, 
war, &c., and sudden loss from others who are made to 
sufier under like conditions, are liable to take away all 
the property of the citizen. His opportunities, to re- 
produce them and not be a charge on the public from 
constrained idleness or non-production, are denied pro- 
tection. He is bound, on account of unfulfilled con- 
tracts involving penalties which become a lien on all 
new credit, thereby preventing his production of Avealth. 

He must be specially protected in his new production 
of wealth, from any lien or claim for the settlement of 
old demands. The lack of this protection makes it im- 
possible for him to produce the wealth necessary for the 
common good of society. It restricts the would-be pro- 
ducer to ineffectual industry, compelling a failure to 
secure the' elevation of industry ordained by Creative 
power. Bankrupt laws therefore become a necessity- 



253 

Otherwise he is left in the power of monopolies to nse 
his labor to put clown the value of all American labor. 

Bankruptcy law^s become a protection, beneficence 
and necessity, to meet all these established conditions, 
fraught wdth all their contingencies, and inevitable un- 
certainties of value of these products, intended to be 
used in exchange, to execute the terms of contracts. 

Proceedings in bankruptcy step in, and determine 
that all the wealth parted with, shall balance that ac- 
quired, and leave the oppressed debtor to begin a new 
start in life, but free fi'om penalties for debt, if there has 
been no fraud. 

It is politically impossible for a State, after being fed- 
erated into the government of the United States, to give 
full protection to a citizen's natural rights. It has as- 
signed that duty to be enforced, only by the Federal 
power. 

Without protection of bankrupt laws, intelligence must 
run risks, or else be forced to degrade itself to use no 
capital to assist economical production that would better 
provide labor its rest or Sabbath. It must be no more 
a producer than the aboriginal Indian, or the Asiatic, 
by hand labor, without the use of capital to increase 
production of wealth, and have it in store. The law, as 
dispensed by present majorities, regardless of constitu- 
tional protection of all, including minorities, gives Amer- 
ican labor the alternative to work for monopolies, or 
produce just enough to preserve a degraded existence 
as the baser alternative, rather than run the risk of in- 
solvency by being self-employed, using borrowed capital. 
It forbids American labor producing and possessing as 
free trade wealth, its own capital and manufacturing 



254 

plant. The capital this labor uses, cannot be its own, 
therefore it must be borrowed, and interest taken out of 
labor's profit for its use. The other alternative of so- 
ciety so poorly educated for its own protection, since it 
votes that only servile labor is permitted, as an Ameri- 
can institution, is suffering or charity. 

American occupation is therefore that of submitting 
to the servility of making monopolies rich, leaving all 
exported American production to the free trade of a 
foreign commerce of a Cobden Club quality. 

American industry is thereby humbled in its pride and 
independence and made poor. It has no capital, or else 
what it possessed horn free ancestry is being rapidly 
taken from it. It is restricted from having the employ- 
ment of working at any foreign commerce to save the 
wealth it produces to be its own capital. Liquidation 
by insolvency goes on in some form or other all the time, 
in thus balancing exchange. Bankruptcy laws therefore 
become an absolute necessity, the only protection, ad- 
justment and relief the law can afford, from this arbi- 
trary condition of debt. 

There is nothing new in this remedy. Moses com- 
manded — not the pound of flesh, because it was so 
nominated in the bond — but that every jubilee year, all 
debts were to be forgiven, and the debtor if unable to 
pay, should not be oppressed, to force him to pay, in 
view of this year drawing nigh. This was enjoined as a 
religious obligation, to teach that under the Supreme 
law of Creative power, all things, the earth and the full- 
ness thereof, natural resources and the products thereof, 
in the form of profits or capital, are to be held in trust 
by the labor producing them, with the duty to be dili- 



255 

gent in production, obeying the law designed for human 
beings to work out their emancipation from all oppres- 
sion by the provision they make to support humanity — 
but not as monopolies, so mankind cannot reach them, 
which by their position in society, makes it more difficult 
to li^e by labor than if there was no wealth saved, but 
no monopolies. 

The fathers of the Federal constitution made a part 
of it a special command or obligation, not to lie dor- 
mant, but to be executed. It enjoined that banki-upt 
laws should be put into force, by those elected to Con- 
gress to execute the trust reposed in them by the consti- 
tution, to enable the liberties guaranteed by the constitu- 
tion to be fully executed in favor of, and for iDrotecting 
those, receiving the injury done by the laws of tariff 
restriction, and other laws impairing the rights of the 
citizens, as well as from natural causes. 

This, we may reasonably infer, was made the privilege 
of every citizen, for the purpose of protecting the rights 
of his wealth, and that without penalties, after he had 
honestly appropriated all the wealth he originally pos- 
sessed, to execute his contracts. The constitution then 
provided — as a State right of protection of citizenship, 
the power delegated to the Federal government in trust 
— that it be executed. 

It required the compliance of this contract, under- 
taken by the Federal relation in good faith and in its 
spirit — to do what the State originally was created with 
power to do — protect the citizen, in that he should not 
be debarred from following the duty, enjoined by Cre- 
ative power, of unrestricted industry, for the purpose 'of 
his own support, that if he had no wealth with which to 
perform his contracts, there should be no penalties. 



256' 

He ^vas not to be taxed in penalties, for the perform- 
ance of former contracts — the original provision for 
which having been lost, or depreciated in value beyond 
his control, rendered him totally unable to satisfy his 
contracts. That there should always be bankrupt laws-, 
in force, which would declare this delivery of alL hi&-. 
wealth, to be a full execution and discharge of all his 
contracts. 

It would appear from this, that Congress fails in it& 
duty, in not always providing bankrupt laws. 

For the constitution, to be only perishable and inop^ 
erable, not from being imperfect in itself, but because it 
is not allowed full development of its functions, is cer- 
tain to be realized, if bankrupt laws, among others, are- 
not maintained, to check the unnatural division of prop-^ 
erty, by oppression only. American enterprise or labor^, 
having its full liberties, would rarely need such protec- 
tion as bankrupt laws ; because of being freed from ar^ 
bitrary variation of values, such as any industry in a 
condition of perpetual debt caused by unequal-value- 
exchange always suffers. 

Bankruptcy laws are a check on monopoly. No Avon- 
der the party in power, holding its cue from monopolies,, 
takes no notice of their need. Monopolies, however, do, 
and restrain all elements of political parties in power, 
so that there shall be no effectual bankrupt laws. If 
popular clamor will force the people's laggard repre- 
sentatives to establish them, following commercial par- 
alysis for special immunity, monopoly's agency Avrites 
the text, and intends they shall never be in the spirit of 
the constitution, by making the court expenses oppres- 
sively burdensome. 



257 

The right, liberty or prerogative of the citizen, to have 
the Federal power provide the protection of a bankrupt 
law, on account of the transference of the national pow- 
ers of the State to the government of the Federal rela- 
tion, must have made it necessary to provide this shield 
to include against wrong done by laws of other nations, 
affecting American free trade resulting from their sys- 
tems of over and unequal taxation, as well as by those 
made under the Federal constitution in violation of its 
spirit ; which it might not be able to provide an adjust- 
ment of in other ways. 

Hence bankrupt laws were designed by the framers of 
the constitution to be made as a perpetual part of the 
Federal code, to have the means, within the power of 
the citizen, to avail of this right, liberty or insurance ; 
these being a necessary part of the full complement, de- 
signed to secure all the rights of American citizenship. 

The complete code of laws, necessary to be executed, 
if the whole contract of the Federal relation as ex- 
pressed by the constitution is to be invoked for the 
protection of the rights of labor to wealth — the supreme, 
natural rights to be secured — which embrace within this 
protection, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, 
include bankrupt laws. 

So our forefathers declared in the constitution, leaving 
the conclusion that the contract with the citizen, made 
by society, for his protection, against force or trespass 
by majorities, as declared by the constitution, is im- 
paired — the full rights of free trade, exchange or pro- 
duction of wealth are denied him, and full protection is 
not provided foi* all circumstances of loss, to which his 
17 



258 

wealth may be exposed beyond bis control, so long as 
bankrupt laws are not in force. 

Another bill of rights respecting them is, that they be 
efficient and effective, by means of a cheap process of 
relief, to thereby not defeat their purpose. That they 
be not — as the last bankrupt law was — a conspiracy of 
official monopoly. 

There is a settled, anti-Christian, anti-constitutional, 
irresponsible policy maintained at Washington, founded 
on aristocratic, imperial, ruling-class and a servile, toil- 
ing class, principles — on the destruction of the autonomy 
of the States — on all sources of civil power being im- 
perial, and emanating from Washington, that there shall 
be no bankrupt laws in force, but a defiance of the power 
of the constitution and oaths of office of representatives 
holding government trusts to enforce them, because 
these militate against monopoly absorption of wealth. 



THE INTEE-STATE COMMEKCE LAW. 

This law was made for the exercise of sovereign na- 
tional powers, inherent in the States, transferred to the 
Federal jurisdiction, for it to secure protection of the 
production of profits to American labor, and to cause 
their subservience to public interests ; wherever this 
labor takes the form of producing carrying charges, if 
railroads traverse beyond the territory of State jurisdic- 
tion. 

American institutions have made railroad's inter-State 
and international use of public easements, to be subject 
to the law of the Federal relation, to thereby protect the 
rights of American labor in its foreign exchanges, from 
all impositions that are not co-operative, but oppressive 
of its free trade rights — through exaction of penalties 
for profits. 

The duties and rights of railroads, are pre-eminently 
those pertaining to public servants in the capacity of 
being common carriers. Kailroads are therefore not 
parties governed by mutual free trade conditions, but 
their contracts must be primarily subject to public in- 
terests, that there shall be no unequal taxation out of 
the profits of American enterprise by them, that all shall 
be treated alike, that the prices of carrying charges shall 
be just and uniform. No more wealth shall be taken 
from any class of American labor, than enough to pro- 
duce the rewards free American labor would obtain in a 
mutual exchange. No less shall be taken from one 
laborer by cut rates, to the damage of another by over- 



260 

charges. Railroads are thereby bonded servants and 
passive subjects to socieby, employed for reasonable 
compensation — as good profits as free American labor is 
entitled to in use of its capital, but no more. 

Society and the State are the only contracting parties. 
The owners of railroads are the employees of society 
permitted by the State, and therefore subject to the 
wardship or protection of the State as American co-op- 
eratives. The State can compel them to labor for the 
public service and agrees that labor shall pay reason- 
able wages for that service, the State protecting society 
from overcharges, but not in withholding fair compensa- 
tion. American possessors of railroads must not put 
any American labor in such a strait that it will not be 
able to produce as much of profits or capital as is its 
natural right, under American institutions, by over- 
charges. They are simply agencies appointed by the 
State, on its own terms. These terms are the privilege 
of appropriating portions of the lands for the private use 
of serving the pviblic. These terms are not a subject of 
option of railroads — mutual agreement or no exchange 
— as between two citizens. The State provides railroads, 
for public uses only. Railroads have no free trade rights 
whatever. They possess only the powers that the State 
has specially granted them, but are on an equality with 
all other wealth, in that it is the duty of the State to 
protect the owners of the wealth invested in them from 
paying any penalties or bounties, or rendering any serv- 
ice without the equivalent due all American capital for 
its use, to any landlord or other monopolies. The law, 
for the privilege of free, exclusive use of these public 
easements for the profits arising from them as a natural 



261 

monopoly, reserves the right to determine what are rea- 
sonable charges, but by such acts must not deteriorate 
the value of wealth. There is no other means of pre • 
tection of public interests. 

The citizen need not be oppressed by the private use 
of public easements for farms, cities, mines, manufacto- 
ries, (fee, requiring special control of the State, because, 
if he is not wrongfully debarred by tariff restrictions that 
violate the fundamental law of his protection, he can 
bring into use foreign competing natural resources by 
using raw materials from them, and force the domestic 
holder to be fair and co-operative for self-interest. He 
cannot import carrying charges, that are his absolute 
necessity. The law does not require expatriation to ac- 
quire others. 

If the Federal government possessed no trust to exer- 
cise its power over railroads for the protection of the 
rights of American labor, then corrupt legislation could 
be had — without remedy except revolution, or the com- 
petency of American labor for self-government — making 
such tariff restrictions as would establish a landlord 
class, and a servile industry. This industry, then not 
being able to hold its own railroads, among the loss of 
all of its wealth, and not being able to keep out of debt 
to foreign exchange, because of having only raw mate- 
rials to export, would pave the way for a foreign rule of 
perpetual debt of interest over American labor, which 
could so guage the prices of carrying charges that it 
could perpetually keep American industry poor, and 
force it to support a foreign ruling class, it being only 
American tenantry, its own government being thereby 
powerless to protect it, its Monroe doctrine nil. 



262 

There is scarcely a doubt but that this is the scheme 
of monopolies of Europe and America — presuming on 
American ignorance of public matters — acting in con- 
cert in formulating the policy of the party in power, as 
it now controls European governments, preventing pro- 
tection of labor ; and why they were so solicitous during 
the last Presidential canvass, and why one platform was 
made to announce its most prominent declaration to be, 
that " no part of the present system of American pro- 
tection should be abandoned," because such a policy 
will affect this result. Although contributions for cam- 
paign expenses were obtained through " fry the fat " 
circulars and other means, from patriotic American man- 
ufacturing labor, which would not knowingly be subject 
to conspiracies against American institutions ; yet these 
failing, the sufficiency of Presidential campaign expenses 
would certainly have been made up by an unseen hand 
behind the throne at Washington, in conspiracies with 
money monopolies of Europe against American personal 
liberties — unless the compromised position of opposing 
parties let monopoly power to believe, that the present 
efforts for tariff reform for protection of American labor 
only, would be nullified. 

Monopoly political science teaches, that imperiaHsm 
of debt under present laws, will without fail develop the 
production of capital, only by a servile American labor 
owning none of it. This status will grow to be firmly 
established under the imperial power of perpetual debt 
of penalties of profits, for the law-provided support of a 
ruling class, and every year it will become more difficult 
to restore the political rights of American enterprise. 

There seems no way so feasible for protection of the 



263 

natural distribution of property, and relieving American 
labor of all taxation of penalties on the production of 
Avealth, bj removing all its tariff restrictions, and asses- 
sing all money — not derived from tariff for protection 
only, with incidental revenue — for public uses out of the 
income from the use of capital that is non-resident ; and 
prevent thereby the foreign rule of debt from crippling 
the freedom of American labor, as for the Federal govern- 
ment to assume trusteeship and control of all railroads, 
securing the capital invested its just rewards, and take 
all government expenses from the earnings. This by 
one stroke, relieves American labor of all over and un- 
equal taxation of the profits it produces, to support a 
foreign income class. It will then begin to own its own 
wealth and buy back the railroad bonds sold in Europe, 
except where the income classes there will live in Amer- 
ica, spending income, because living — by tariff protec- 
tion of American labor only, by eliminating all protection 
of private interests — will be so cheap and good in Amer- 
ica. 

Eemove all tariff restrictions — that will only generate 
monopolies of American wealth — so that American labor 
can own its own wealth to use ; that is, those on all raw 
materials that labor can convert into its own wealth, and 
foreign subsistence that its own manufactures pay for 
by direct exchange. 

The third great relief is the free use of greenbacks to 
the extent public debt exists and should exist tor the 
public good. 

These conditions will shift all taxation for public uses 
to income capital — such as now rests in Europe free 
from it — which will then be held by the American labor 



264 

class, although all of this class will not be actually labor- 
ing. Much of it will be living on the income of capital. 
Income classes, herein referred to, are those whose in- 
come is provided by the government, from penalties re- 
sulting from the political condition in which its labor is 
placed. Income from capital acquired through labor is 
the subject of lawful protection from bounty charges. 

The present move in Congress making silver legal 
tender — the tariff for revenue still existing in principle 
— will enable it to pay the debts of foreign exchange for 
which American labor is responsible. Since, however, 
the legal tender qualities will cause silver to return, it 
will buy more railroad and manufacturing properties to 
support a larger income class than ever, thus by Ameri- 
can toil making American resident wealth worth less 
because of being thus more bonded. Carrying charges 
will grow to be higher, and ability to pay them will be 
less. 

The removal of tariff restrictions for revenue only will 
be the great motive to make capital co-operative with 
labor, as its means for speculative exchange to thereby 
secure the profits labor has earned, will by such legis- 
lative protection of American labor, be cut off. 

The government will then protect the production of 
wealth in u^e of carrying charges, by compelling their 
sale by the owners of railroads, for enough to pay ex- 
penses, interest or profits of capital invested, ancl the 
government expenses, and have no cut rates that favor 
one interest at cost of another, and so depreciate Amer- 
ican railroad property, that it passes into foreign hands 
at less than it is worth to American labor. 
No State shall recoup for the damages suffered, on 



265 

account of the failure of protection due by the Federal 
government. Labor must learn to vote to sustain public 
interest rule of the federation, over private interests, as 
the only means for political protection. Labor unions 
for educational purposes, and capital combines for more 
economical production of wealth, are all right, but their 
benefits are nullified by neglect to preserve the great 
public interests that must be protected ; or else Ameri- 
can labor will never have any unbonded wealth to pro- 
tect. Legislation will then be a squabble of one mo- 
nopoly getting the best of another, as it is in Europe. 

States might — but for Federal party power, represent- 
ing as it does, private or monopoly interests — be able to 
co-operate, and fairly correct the ground-work cause.' 
that creates a clamor for corrective, protective, retalia- 
tive remedies, such as the inter-State commerce law. 
State political remedies must be by corrective Federal 
representation, forbidding resort to any means of per- 
petual redress for established political evils, and avoid 
causes for revolution, that Federal imperialism generate. 

These would abate the fundamental evil — the over and 
unequal taxation on American productions caused by the 
present tariff — for-revenue-onl}^ — restrictions, and the 
establishment of a monopoly of credit currency. 

United political, co-operative State representation in 
the Federal relation, would compel monopoly power at 
Washington to abdicate. This power is fostered only 
by Federal, arbitrary imperial restrictions on the at- 
tempts of American labor to produce wealth for itself. 
These restrictions force the capital of railroads to pro- 
tect itself by recoupment for the damages suffered 
through protection of American landlordism. Their 



266 

method is by enhancement of prices for which thej sell 
their carrying charges. If there is temporarily any cut 
rates — which should not be allowed, as being against the 
public interests — this is only a stock-jobbing deal, to 
enable American and European monopolists to buy rail- 
road properties at less than they cost American labor, 
and then consolidate and draw still more oppressive in- 
come from its toil. Eailroads are forced bylaw to make 
these overcharges to protect themselves, since the law 
does not protect them as American laborers. These 
overcharges become capital combines in their nature, as 
every other form of production of wealth must be for 
self-protection, under a system of civil law that protects 
private or monopoly interests only, at cost of public in- 
terests, exacting penalties from labor only, protecting 
the non-resident wealthy man from taxation on his 
capital, for enhanced cost of living. 

The present tariff restrictions of costly, arbitrary, im- 
perial, injurious regulations of trade, charging the pro- 
duction of American wealth, thereby making a tax of 
perpetual debt on productions of American labor, having 
for that object, robbery of the fruits of toil, is the cause 
— its correction the remedy. 

There should be no inter-State commerce law, unless 
it is made under free-trade conditions for all American 
wealth. 

Income wealth or monopoly — as a law-protected con- 
dition — differs from organization of capital for econom- 
ical production. The former restricts free trade or 
production of wealth, charging all forms of wealth all 
their profits. Their charges are in the nature of penal- 
ties, without responsibility or equivalent in return. 



267 

Organization for economy of production, rendering 
more than otherwise of wealth for the same labor, raises 
the value of labor — yields it more profits or capital. 
Because some therefore make better wages than others, 
is no reason that they should be restricted in producing 
them. This is not the cause of others getting less wealth 
and being out of employment, as some maintain, who 
would destroy machinery, and use agrarian power for 
distribution of wealth. Such an ignorant industry is 
incompetent for self-government, and therefore permits 
these trade restrictions as the result of asking paternal 
bread, instead of every one using his own right arm to 
procure it — the sole cause of its poverty, because it de- 
mands paternal help, instead of paternal protection of 
its equality. 

Organization is but the result of development, educa-^ 
tion, individual power of self-reliance and independence 
of free trade, depending on energy for the result, with- 
out oppression, but rather co-operative with other in- 
dustry — producing more profits for itself, yet helping to 
produce more for others. 

Organization is to be encouraged as a public good,, 
because it makes more wealth for less labor. 

That is only if American wealth is free from every re- 
striction in its exchange, to thereby induce a demand 
for it, because more valuable. Otherwise this greater 
production of wealth goes only to monopoly, and makes 
labor more servile. 

Eailroads, as combinations of organized capital, are 
in their qualities among the most valuable of the age — 
on account of having the greatest labor-saving facilities 
that American industry produces and can possess. They 



268 

are therefore a public good — an inclispensible necessity 
of American citizenship, if it is to have great wealth 
under a tariff protective of itself only, for its industry. 

They improve the value of all other wealth, by their 
production, free trade and exchange of carrying charges. 
They make American exchanges at intrinsically less cost 
of carrying charges — with less labor, yet better profits — 
and in abundance enough, so that industry can elevate 
itself, and acquire the full dignity of American citizen- 
ship, by having produced a sufficiency of wealth with 
only reasonable labor, without toil, having time for all 
its educational and religious duties, and for refreshment 
and entertainment in those agreeable diversions man is 
capable of enj oying as a social, reasoning being, whose 
human nature has not been outraged by the oppressions 
of the civil law, into the practice of sensualism for pleas- 
ure. 

On this account, to tax the capital of railroads for the 
gain of bounty acquisitions to any profits or wealth that 
are improvements on natural-resource monopolies, which 
are necessary to be merged }vith and make a part of the 
railroads, is to make them dependent and taxed, rather 
than independent, free trade wealth, and forces them to 
tax the profits of labor in prices of carrying charges. 

How can they compete with Canadian, Mexican and 
Isthmus routes, if made by bounties to American land- 
lords for equipment to cost more ? It forces them for 
simple self -protection, because it forces to a greater 
cost in producing them, to require higher prices for car- 
rying charges, out of American consumers, who vote 
these bounties. They therefore must be the agencies 
to impoverish, by taxing the production of other capital 



269 

higher prices for carrying charges, that would better 
patronize them by mutual exchanges if their wealth was 
free, also buy and own the bonds on them as American 
investments, with the capital that American labor can 
acquire, rather than have them owned by income, non- 
resident investors. 

Present tariff restrictions prevent American industry 
deriving any benefit from the income it produces, 
American labor pays that income instead of receiving it. 

Kailroads being overcharged by American landlords 
that are protected by present tariff restrictions, must 
then also pay more for operating expenses, because all 
these are charged in like manner. Their local taxes 
also are more on account of this condition. All com- 
bined force the American labor producing them to get 
into debt and sell liens on them abroad too cheap, be- 
cause of being deprived of a home market for the sale 
of bonds on them, American labor being too impover- 
ished by these tariff restrictions on its free trade to be 
able to buy Ihem. They are therefore sold in Europe^ 
where monopoly wealth can scalp the taxed-into-debt 
wealth of the world into its own coffers for less than 
cost to produce it. 

American railroads are forced to limit their produc- 
tion of carrying charges, and charge more for those they 
do produce, being restricted to a limited, non-co-opera- 
tive, monopoly, taxed trade market for the sale of them. 
They can sell only a limited amount to meet all their 
government-inflicted over charges,being compelled there- 
fore to charge enough to meet all these overcharges, on 
to American wealth only, not on foreign wealth, depre- 
ciating its value on this account. How can they avoid 



270 

this and keep their own credit good ? How can they 
otherwise avoid depreciating their own value, since they 
have to pay bounty prices for all their expenses. 

It is found necessary to do this, on account of Federal 
restrictions on their right of free trade. This alone pre- 
vents them from making their carrying charges cheaper 
to the extent of being co-operative, free trade products. 
Their present political restrictions therefore prevent 
co-operation for the purpose of assisting to make manu- 
factures low priced enough for a free trade foreign com- 
merce, giving themselves, operatives, capitalists and all 
concerned good wages, by retaining profits of manufac- 
ture for division among themselves, rather than that 
these profits be absorbed by monopoly income aristoc- 
racies to be spent abroad, and leave the wealth of all 
concerned to be less, labor producing railroads included, 
because depleted of profits that go to non-producing 
monopolists. 

The present industrial results, arising from their po- 
litical relations, are — that the more profitable American 
wealth is, from the intelligence of her industry — in pro- 
ducing more for less labor — the more is it depreciated 
in value, by being restricted in free trade to secure good 
value, that would enable producers to themselves secure 
the profits they produce, by their opportunity to get the 
best or most valuable exchanges. Hence there is a de- 
mand for protected natural resources to tax labor in 
their use. This includes railroads. It could not be so 
if American labor was free to export any products it 
€culd make. Railroad's self interest would induce the 
surplus for export to be manufactures rather than raw 
materials. 



I 



271 

Producers of railroad carrying charges suffer, among 
all the producers of American wealth, even if the bond- 
holder in Europe is not shocked at the poor net wages 
earned for the labor of railroading in the American fed- 
eration, in fact in all the Americas. 

Eailroads must become a political power as a party 
organization, going further and retaliating on the people's 
wealth, the more legislation by the people's representa- 
tives restrict their free trade. 

Politician's sop, to quiet the people, who are only 
screwing the vice tighter, that pinches their own fingers, 
by their support of present tariff restriction, and the 
present inter-State commerce law at the same time, is 
thrown out in the form of the inter-State commerce law 
— during this contest of the wealth of the people against 
the railroads, for prior rehef from the overcharges for 
bounties to landlord monopolies, prevailing on the cost 
of all production. 

The result of the contest of conflicting interests, must 
be, that a large portion of the railroads will be so depre- 
ciated in value, that they will be picked up at way below 
their cost to American industry, by scalping speculators 
of Europe as well as America, American industry suffer- 
ing all the loss thereby. They will then become the 
form of a great imperial monopoly landlord power, oc- 
cupying easements beyond State control, making ten- 
antry of American industry, from pensioners to the 
President — men in every calling of industry — the profits 
all going to where consumers are taxed the least to sup- 
port income classes. Railroads can then afford to buy 
legislation, that will in the dog-eat-dog trade dispensa- 
tion, favor their interests of monopoUzing themselves. 



272 

To prevent this, the corrective political justice due 
them, as well as all other forms of Federal wealth, must 
be restored by the united Federal representative action 
of the States, in harmony with the spirit of the Federal 
relation. 

Constitutional protection against any taxation by pa- 
ternal government monopolies, on profits of American 
labor, including the capital of railroads, must prevail. 
Then an era of interested co-operation of railroads with 
all other American labor will occur. Then there will be 
more unredressed complaints of favoritism. No more 
injury from long and short haul differences. None for 
local taxes levied under State jurisdiction. 

The political question is developing in the understand- 
ing of American industrial citizenship as to whether the 
State has any right to tax the improvements on public 
easments used as common carriers at all, they being 
international manufactories of wealth for the public. 
Whether can State equality be preserved, while this 
power of local taxation by State authority exists, it be- 
ing a check on inter-State commerce, one State paying 
more toll on it than another, thereby causing the wealth 
of one State to contribute to the support of the institu- 
tions of another. 

What protection the capital of railroads wants, is to 
be put on a constitutional par of value with untaxed 
wealth of the world's production. Such protection will 
enable them to compete with Canadian railroads, unless 
subsidized. This subsidy help is, however, an active 
factor, needing more protection of American railroads 
in their competing relations. American railroads must 
be free wealth to compete with those of Europe and 



273 

Asia, South America and Africa, that these latter be 
not able to furnish products for American consumption 
so cheap, that American manufactures will neither be 
made in competition nor for foreign exchange. They 
must have all the cost for their equipment and running 
expenses, free from penalty dues. All wealth of opera- 
tives, coal, ore, lumber, paint, iron, roads, manufactures, 
cities, harbors, &c., must be free from bounties in their 
cost of production, so that the producer offering them 
to railroads must not for self-protection, demand en- 
hanced prices, because the law compelled him to pay 
bounties. 

These must not be taxed in penalties, if railroads are 
to be independent, free trade capital, competing success- 
fully with all foreign investments of like kinds, in their 
production of carrying charges. 

The result will then be, that there will be no carrying 
charges earned, that will not pay profits and there will 
be every incentive of gain for American labor to invest 
in these improvements, to earn profits or income from 
the greatest possible use, because they can then make 
carrying charges so cheap. 

The inter-State commerce law is not the relief Ameri- 
can producers of wheat, cotton, vegetables, live stock, 
hops, wool, silver, copper, manufactures, <fec., including 
railroads, wants. Under constitutional protection, of 
the independence and liberty of all wealth from every 
over and unequal taxation for penalties, the common 
law of society has well defined principles of right, oblig- 
atory on common carriers, which as well as self-interest 
prompt them to co-operation, thereby being pohtically 
protected in doing the public justice. 
18 



274 

It must result with this protection, that the railroads' 
greatest interest will be co-operatiye, to foster the pro- 
duction of all forms of wealth along their lines, by their 
co-operation rather than tax that production, or to re- 
strict its free trade in any way, even by over priced car- 
rying charges, well knowing that free trade is their life. 
Cut rates will then not pay. 

This would secure the patronage of all forms of wealth 
in exchange for carrying charges, with no fear of over- 
competition of railroads forcing to combinations for self- 
protection. They would prefer economy in production 
of carrying charges, to induce the exchange of other 
wealth for them. 

Let American labor then be just in performance of its 
political duties under the constitution. Never lend itself 
to be used by its vote, as the exponent of popular errors. 
This will be necessary, in order to restore the spirit of 
the American Federal constitution, to be the protecting 
shield of the great liberties of free trade in American 
wealth, including that of railroads, from all charges of 
bounties by monopolies. They must be free to secure 
their ow^n market, sale, exchange and consumption, by 
facilitating American foreign commerce. They must 
have free trade and independence, never be taxed with- 
out right, never dependent wealth, on monopolies but 
American labor, for employment. Never American lib- 
erties be impaired in the use of them. Americans be 
freemen ever. Tenantry, never. The sources of power 
emanating from the people through their own States, 
free from imperial control of political parties organized 
and seated at Washington. 



THE EFFECT OF LARGE PERSONAL OR COR- 
PORATE ESTATES, 

LIKE THOSE OF THE VANDERBILTS, GOULDS, ASTOES, STAND- 
ARD OIL COMPANY, ROTHSCHILDS, THE ERIE CANAL 
AND OTHERS, ON THE VALUE OF WEALTH TO 
THE AMERICAN LABOR PRODUCING IT. 

It is the boast of American institutions, that they have 
no establishment of, and no provision for, entaihnents 
on American sources of wealth. That these belong to 
the people in common, who are equally entitled to ben- 
efits derived from them without charge. That in renting 
them to individuals and corporations, their natural values 
for improvements are not to be used to draw revenues from 
the public, but are subject to taxation, as income invest- 
ments for public uses. That it is the duty of the indi- 
vidual possessors to whom society has granted freeholds, 
to afford it the free use of them for what they are worth 
in profits for the free trade use of the capital of improve- 
ments which have been put on them, for the purpose of 
co-operating with the whole American political society 
of labor in procuring wealth therefrom. That the great 
reason of the duty of individual holders to render equiv- 
alent, equal, free trade exchange of their products of 
raw materials, is that American society asks no revenue 
for their individual use, although renting or granting 
freeholds to individuals, and has united all its States or 
nationalities under American institutions, which provide 
that there shall be no American or foreign landlord 



276 

power to exact any penalties for their free use, so that 
there shall be abundance of the sources of wealth — for 
all to use. 

It is not the possession of large personal or^corporate 
estates under personal condition of tenure, that oppresses 
the American citizen. These, under the protection of 
the fundamental law, unvitiated in their free trade rights, 
would only benefit him by their co-operation to make 
his wealth more valuable. It is the violation of the civil 
law, which is made to preserve the equality of right per- 
taining to this wealth in large estates, no more and no 
less than the equality due to the right of wealth of the 
humblest citizen that oppresses labor. 

This is firstly through tariff restrictions on the pro- 
duction of wealth by American citizens restricting their 
own free trade ; and secondly, the other great monopoly 
reserve of money from its free trade use as legal tender, 
that forces these large estates to become monopolies — 
however for self-protection only, let it be said in justice 
to the patriotism of every resident American citizen. 

. If personal entailments, or conditional contracts for 
holding the trusteeship, possession and control of Avealth 
represented by improved real estate, including railroads, 
are made and handed down through succeeding genera- 
tions of the same family, their following and co-opera- 
tors ; the mere fact of such forms of succession involving 
practically entailments of approved economical policies 
for their management of the wealth involved, is of itself 
perfectly lawful, and also according to the law of nature, 
because the personal right exists in the power of the 
living possessor, to break a family policy of protection 



277 

which cannot attach to such estates to restrict their free 
trade against pnbhc interests. 

There is no lawfnl objection to the holding of such 
estates, these being simply large bodies of free trade 
wealth, nor in the personal understanding had by fami- 
lies like the Yanderbilts, Goulds, Astors, Standard Oil 
Company and Rothschild's, or the State of New York in 
the use of its private estate of the Erie canal. 

If these conditions become more powerfu.1 as private, 
unprotected monopolies, they are so because of laws 
like the present tariff restrictions, made to suppress free 
trade in the use of all taxed American wealth, including 
these estates. 

The magnitude of the concentration of wealth under 
the management of , one head, is perfectly lawful under 
American institutions. It is the violation of that pro- 
tection that forces to recoup for damage done them by 
oppressive official power, on other unprotected wealth, 
not so strong to resist charges on their free trade or ex- 
change. 

Because large estates are more successful as monopo- 
lies, on account of the more industrious, thrifty, better 
educated management than others, and thereby there is 
more economical production of American weg^lth, this is 
no lawful reason why they should not have full protec- 
tion of the law, since they are lawfully possessed. They 
should not be oppressed by restrictions like the inter- 
State commerce law, silver coinage law, or tariff restric- 
tions, because laws have not been made in that spirit of 
Christian liberty, which the constitution only provides 
for, but to violate the rights of holders of property, and 
thereby these laws have been anarchial, destructive and 



278 

disintegrating in their nature, tending back from law 
and order to internal contentions, rather than co-opera- 
tion. This is no reason for special legislation, like the 
inter-State commerce law, nor for a spirit of agrarian- 
ism in any other form to prevail against them. To 
touch large estates without lawful proceedings for pro- 
tection of rights common to all, is as much a wrong as 
to touch the small estates of the poor. 

Mere accumulation of American wealth, no matter 
how unevenly distributed as the result of enterprise, 
among those of American citizenship, is no wrong of it- 
self. The wrong is political, in that American labor 
does not possess it. The greater the accumulation of 
wealth, necessary for the wants of society made without 
oppression of labor, and the more available and ready 
for exchange, as needed for distribution by free trade 
from all unnecessary restrictions, the better. 

Unequal distribution of property, can only be a public 
good, however, in a society of perfect, equal, personal 
right in the use of wealth, to exchange in free trade-from- 
debt-of-penalties political condition. 

Otherwise the condition involves monopoly of capital, 
because of the advantages accruing under unequal rights 
of wealth growing out of tariff restrictions on American 
free trade in her own wealth, instead of these restrictions 
lawfully intended against any form of foreign production, 
that would work wrong to the profits of American in- 
dustry. 

Commodore Vanderbilt, an American citizen, would 
have produced his American carrying charges of Ameri- 
can free trade foreign commerce, using his American co- 
operative capital of ships all over the globe, cheap 



279 

enough for American manufactures to have made them 
their own natural, mutual co-operative medium of ex- 
changes, and that without subsidies. He would have 
done it by direct exchange with those nations that could 
buy as much in value of these, as of those produced by 
other nations, in exchange for their products. 

The reason why he, an American, citizen, did not do 
so, was not because of incapacity or unwillingness of 
American industry to produce the wealth of ships, fuel, 
ship stores, equipment, &c., at their free trade value, but 
because tariff restrictions, on American free trade, made 
it possible for private interests of monopolies to charge 
so much for raw materials, that it compelled him to pay 
more as an American laborer for his capital, consisting 
of ships, fuel, equipment, &c., and to ask enough more 
for carrying charges than he was satisfied to work for, 
as good enough American wages for himself, to meet the 
costs for the enhanced cost by bounty charges for ships, 
fuel, ship stores, &c., that American producers of manu- 
facturers could not afford to pay him his price, and have 
enough left to secure themselves good profits, since they 
also were under the same ban, that of supporting pure 
bounty income landlord monopolies. These bounties 
took all their manufactures come to, to pay the bounties, 
which thereby killed American foreign commerce, forcing 
so many to be idle at home, all imported exchanges to 
cost more American labor to acquire them, and a foreign 
perpetual debt of interest to be saddled out of the profit 
of American industry, to support an European aris- 
tocracy. 

The lackeys of monopolies are ready to affirm, that 
tariff restrictions as levied, are not taxes at all, that 



280 

there is no need of buying anything abroad, and that no 
one need pay the penalties of custom dpaties if he does 
not wish to. 

Is there then no political wrnog depreciating the value 
of American wealth, and thereby destroying its free 
trade foreign commerce ? Let any American citizen 
say, if he can, that he is not forced to be either under 
penalties for supporting monopolies, or to pay a custom 
duty on imported necesary products ! Is he not injured 
in the value of the wealth he possesses by such tariff 
restriction? Does it not cost more of his profits or 
capital, be they silver, gold, lead, wheat, cotton, wool, 
shoes, cloth, railroad, carrying charges, &c., to live on, 
under these conditions? Is his then a free trade condi- 
tion at all? Is he not restricted in getting as good 
value for his products, which are the wages of his enter- 
prise, as the Federal relation, un violated by tariff re- 
strictions for revenue out of them, would permit ? Is 
there not an extra cost or charge put on them ? Is there 
not a penalty, for no wrong done, taken out of labor's 
profits only to support bounty prices of monopolized 
American raw materials, that could not exist without 
these tariff restrictions ? 

Is not the only capital produced by American labor, 
that is not bonded as soon as produced, to contribute to 
support of domestic and foreign income classes and the 
support of the government, the non-resident capital? 
Is it not loaned to American labor, escaping taxation by 
being non-resident, its owners employing foreign labor 
to provide their living ? Is not wealth of American labor 
depreciated thereby, and that to support income classes 
abroad ? Is not resident or national capital thereby of 



281 

less value to American labor V Then does it not there- 
by have less wealth for its industry r Does it not receive 
less wealth on account of tariff restrictions on American 
free trade, such as drove a Yanderbilt — an American cit- 
izen crushed out of foreign fi-ee trade by mandates from 
Washington made to serve private interests — from the 
sea and consigned his vessels to rot at their Avharfs, by 
depriving him — without recompense for his political 
privileges — of the loss of the free trade pertaining to his 
wealth as a Federal right of American citizenship ? Was 
not this Yanderbilt — an American laborer — deprived of 
the enterprising liberties of American labor under the 
Federal relation in making a market for his wealth 
abroad, to obtain a fair value where there was a mutual 
free trade demand ; there being no home demand at so 
good value in profits or capital for the great amount he, 
an American citizen, was capable of producing with the 
use of labor-saving devices, which intelligent American 
labor provided him to co-operate with? 

Was he not forbidden thereby to increase his accu- 
mulations of American capital or wealth by his Ameri- 
can labor and forced to speculate, or else bottle up his 
restless energies? Was not all this done that there 
might be built up an American aristocracy of monopoly 
of natural resources, as an irresponsible taxing-power 
over American labor — the base of the social and indus- 
trial fabric of a new order of imperial, anti- American 
institutions ; humbling the pride of an American citizen 
willing to be independent and self-reliant, providing his 
own wealth by his own energies, because enough of his 
co-laborers with the venal vote declared that there 
should be a political policy to rob him of his profits as 



282 

fast as produced to subserve private at expense of the 
public interests ? Was it not intended that this im- 
perial policy should thereby be a part of the funda- 
mental law and constitution itself, by tradition and bad 
precedent ? Are not these f alse-to-liberty precedents an 
argument used a good deal now-a-days as a justification 
for the still more obliteration even of the ruins of tiie 
fabric of American liberties of labor ; just as vicious mo- 
nopoly establishments have impaired the freedom of 
British citizenship, and the vigor of British liberty, 
under the common law of England, keeping unprovided 
labor in toil, by themselves becoming actually a part of 
the British constitution, established or engrafted on it 
during times of public financial stress ? Was not the 
same opportunity of public distress by exhaustive war 
availed of to oppress American labor and take away its 
liberties without any need, in fact aggravating American 
financial stress, in defiance of constitutional provision 
for protection from all siich oppressions ; all this to 
serve monopoly interests — a policy the party in power 
has pledged itself to maintain by its last Federal policy 
platform ? 

Since tariff restrictions are now made, not for the 
public, but private interests, taxing the public interests 
only to give bounties for private gain, and all the fiscal 
revenue, and as they protect private interests, only with- 
in the realms of their jurisdiction, and can compel only 
American producers and consumers to disgorge them ; 
then a Yanderbilt, or any other American citizen, must 
force his restless spirit of American enterprise to be 
still, or else confine the production of wealth to Avhere 
the power of the Federal relation will protect, in forcing 



283 

enhanced prices from American consumers, to thereby 
secure natural profits at cost of his co-laborers — to get 
enough only to pay for bounty charges, and have no 
profits perhaps. 

He cannot do this abroad, because foreign products 
have less bounty charges, and have therefore free trade? 
to undersell him. His own wages are taxed, not for 
pnblic uses, therefore are not protected in the spirit of 
American institutions. He is restricted from free for- 
eign trade because of bounty charges on his wages be- 
fore leaving home. He can, however, force American 
producers of these products, whose home market is de- 
stroyed by tariff restrictions, to pay his prices, they hav- 
ing Qo other alternative, although he would prefer a 
free-trade foreign commerce status, so he could also do 
the American foreign commerce with her manufactures. 

Mr. Vanderbilt does not find as good a market abroad 
for his wages, under a tariff that makes American pro- 
ducers pay all taxes, and bounties besides. He knows 
he can get full value at home, at expense of American 
profits of labor. He can be a monopolist for carrying 
the American products of gold, silver, copper, wheats 
cotton, &c., for export by compulsion under these Amer- 
ican free trade restrictions. There is no help for it. If 
the inter-State commerce law should stop him from 
making himself good wages, he need not make any. 
Compelling him to lose his charter rights would not help 
labor. The market for these artificially surplus products 
of wheat, cotton, wool, silver, (fee, would be still poorer. 
Perhaps the wealth of corn would become the low grade 
wealth of fuel, instead of meat, tea, coffee, <fec., and the 
wages of cotton become fertilizers, instead of cloth, oil 
and all American imports. 



284 

The policy of the party in power is, that the big fish 
«hall by political right eat up the little ones. They must 
do it. The law forbids them any other food. This was 
not the purpose of the founders of the Federal govern- 
ment. The man, more opulent and intelJigent, may 
under present dispensation, appropriate the wealth of 
the man of family without equivalent, who must toil too 
hard to become intelligent enough to protect his own 
wages, by giving the necessary time to speculation that 
the law gives bounties to. This man of family should be 
protected in having the free trade value of profits there 
is in his wages, from all monopoly prices, in exchanging 
them, to apply to the education and elevation of his 
family, so that its members will not consume the profits 
saved for his old age, but be better accumulators than 
he has been, by development. At present American cit- 
izenship cannot retain the profits or capital it produces, 
but monopolies absorb them. The members of each 
generation start out poorer and more dependent than 
their fathers. 

A Yanderbilt, a Gould, an Astor, a Standard Oil Com- 
pany, a Rothschild — with the aid of American monopoly 
protection — will acquire liens on every form of Ameri- 
can v\^ealth, principally railroads — because these are 
more directly under Federal control, and can be better 
made to yield revenue by absorbing the profits of all 
other American wages, payable as interest on bonds and 
stocks, which escape all taxation in fact, drawing pure, 
net income ; the corporations having possession of the 
wealth of improvements on which bonds are secured, 
paying the local taxes, and issuing the contracts of stocks 
and bonds without locality, liens on mines, manufacto- 



285 

ries of cloth, lumber, beer, iloiir, salt, &c., capital com- 
ing from Europe, if there is not enough at home, its 
income to be spent in Europe, to thereby get support in 
Europe by the profits arising from the production of 
toil by American industry. 

How then do American entailments or successions 
become established in perpetuity — in the nature of land- 
lord interests of Europe, but more powerful, and yield- 
ing better profits ? How is the law of the constitution 
violated, in establishing monopoly so effectually, that 
the Federal relation is ruled over by imperial power, and 
the sovereignty of the States is banished fi'om the realm ? 

A Vanderbilt, an American laborer, retiring from 
labor, because American labor preferred to take its 
chances, protecting monopolies of American real estate 
and taking bounties all out of the profits of labor, fore- 
saw that it was not difficult for demagogues to persuade 
the American people having possession of natural mo- 
nopolies, into the belief that the more landlord monop- 
olies existing, the better for each who has any land, so 
every one voted to make a monopoly of his produce of 
wool, wheat, potatoes, iron, coal, &c., &c. 

They have been persuaded that tariff restrictions 
placed on foreign raw materials competing with their 
own, made their land more valuable, and thereby they 
got more wealth. They have believed this to be the 
only way to get any protection, they calling bounties or 
monopolies protection. He prudently, therefore, pro- 
vided an estate, planted on grants of public easements, 
for his family, whereby he could beat the game of these 
incompetent self -protectionists by taxing other Ameri- 
can consumers and co-laborers. He saw they could not 



286 

force bounty-priced raw materials on American labor 
only for home wants. This labor would refuse to pro- 
duce wealth for exports, the profits to be slaughtered in 
such a purchasing market, where the monopolist only 
got them. These self-protectionists — not protectionists 
of the public interests, but of their own at cost of public 
interests — must sell their raw materials abroad, because 
they killed manufacturing labor for exports. He had 
control of transportation. They could not make the 
capital to provide competing routes. These landlord 
protection monopolists did not try to find a home mar- 
ket by making it profitable to home consumers to buy 
their products, but wanted the profits themselves mth- 
out earning them, and American labor to toil for a bare 
living. They voted that American labor should toil for 
their profits, not its own. Co-operation was no element 
of their ideas of protection. Let labor work and land- 
lords who can control supplies of necessities of life have 
the surplus, profits or capital, the condition in Europe 
from which American labor escaped, at cost of the revo- 
lution. 

As a consequence of these monopoly conditions, and 
tthose of paternal government monopoly conditions of 
credit, supplanting the use of legal tender for currency, 
and the Federal unit of measure for the value of all other 
wages, there have been periods of insolvency, during 
which Yanderbilt, an American citizen, beat this game 
of protection, when liens on railroads have been bought 
^t greatly below their labor value because of being in 
debt, as pure penalties or sacrifices. Estates secured in 
large amounts in this way, have been placed under con- 
trol of one heir, and have since so descended, all the 



287 

rest of the family and co-laborers agreeing to this man- 
agement. 

Here is a power, occupying the public domain, that 
can become a great landlord establishment, enabled to 
tax or draw bounty revenues from all other forms of 
wealth, in the price of its carrying charges, by virtue of 
the business powers it has over an industry servile to 
interest on perpetual debt. 

The remedy, making raiboads co-operatively profit- 
able, will be, to remove all restrictions to free trade in 
American wealth. This alone will make a Vanderbilt a 
co-operative laborer, voluntarily using his capital in 
railroads to co-operate with other American labor, to 
encourage the largest possible production of wealth, from 
which railroads mil get their share — more profits by 
encouraging manufacturing population along their lines 
to manufacture exports from American raw materials. 

The system of industry adopted by the Standard Oil 
Company results in labor-saving economy — in the less 
cost of the wealth of oil — in less of senseless American 
toil. Any oppressions arising from its existence, can 
only be traced to Federal restrictions, which alone pre- 
vent the Standard Oil Company from being a co-oper- 
ative laborer. Taxed capital, organized into combines 
for self-protection, is not permitted to get its natural 
amount of profits without squeezing or scalping other 
American wealth out of its profits. If the Standard Oil 
Company could have unlimited free trade for its pro- 
duct, in its efforts to acquire foreign wealth, by simply 
less cost of production, then the price of oil would be 
so low, yet profitable, that American foreign free trade 
would be assured. This would afford American indus- 



288 

try the oil it consumes at the lowered price, thereby im- 
proving the value of its wealth, and the Standard Oil 
Company make better profits thereby. 

The Standard Oil Company would then make direct, 
exchanges for tea, coffee, fruit, hides, rubber, &c., in 
American ships, not through the medium of European 
oil tanks, enabling it to sell these imported teas, coffees, 
&c., cheaper to American consumers, and by being pro- 
tected in being co-operative, still get more wealth in 
exchange for its oil. 

The same cost of oil would buy more tea, coffee, or- 
namental wood, lumber, &c. This would enable all 
American manufacturers or producers of potatoes, hops, 
cheese, wool, cotton, meat, silver, gold, iron, cloth ^ 
shoes, carpets, machinery, railroads, &c., to sell them 
cheaper, and still have better profits, perhaps exporting^ 
all kinds of them, including railroads, to other countries 
to acquire wealth desirable for elevation of American 
labor. 

The law of free trade protecting, enables them to be 
better able to have a foreign as well as a domestic mar- 
]£et — better profits — more accumulations of capital dis- 
tributed to industry, whose principal pastime is spending 
them at home ; less to monopoly income, whose princi- 
pal pastime is spending them abroad. 

The present political status, controlling the Standard 
Oil Company's attempts to earn profits for itself — ^just 
as much as any man of industry should earn for the 
same labor and co-operative use of his capital — is the 
present tariff restrictions as the principal cause. It 
forces into one channel for making profits, and that is 



I 



289 

not a labor, but a speculative one. It must scalp those 
who produce the oil-wells and holes. 

These have only a limited market, contending against 
competing surplus crude oil at home. Some of this oil 
is in debt and must be sold on a market in which nat- 
ural demand is destroyed, too low, and thereby operates 
to cause all crude oil to have the same low price — the 
condition of the wool, hop, cheese, wheat, silver, copper 
and all other American markets. 

There is a popular fallacy, that the Standard Oil Com- 
pany is not a benefaction, but rather a public injury. 
All organizations of American capital for more econom- 
ical production of wealth, are public benefits. They 
operate to make more profits for American labor. They 
enable the producer not to be a mere toiler, in order to 
produce a modicum of good wages ; that is, if the wages 
of American production are free, by not having charges 
of penalties on them with no return or equal exchange, 
Under present free trade restrictions the reverse is the 
case. The Standard Oil Company is not the cause. 
Federal statutes, in violation of their protection, is the 
cause. Their abatement, not the Standard Oil Com- 
pany's extinction, is the remedy. Under constitutional 
protection, the Standard Oil Company would be a bright 
particular star in the halo of American enterprise and 
glory. 

The State of New York, as a corporate industrial or- 
ganization with political powers, made an assessment on 
the wealth of the people within her jurisdiction and con- 
verted it into improvements upon her easements or nat- 
ural resources, called the Erie Canal. This investment 
has always suifered from restricted trade, enjoined by 
19 



290 

Federal relations — forcing it to carry raw materials 
through the State for foreign labor to manufacture. 
This labor-saving device of co-operative capital of New 
York, yielded profits only until supply overtook demand 
— as pure bounties. 

Now it is maintained at public expense to overcome 
the capital-combine conditions of railroads, which alone 
are caused, because the policy of imperial control exer- 
cised by the Federal relation forces them to become 
such. 

The non -performance of the contract of protection by 
the Federal relation, has prevented the building up of 
manufactures in this State for foreign commerce, and in 
the West as fast as the people needed and would have 
had, they never getting enough of them. 

This would have made commerce of the Erie Canal 
more profitable than was through transportation of the 
Western raw materials en route to Europe, where labor 
remained to manufacture for foreign trade — manufactur- 
ers along the line consuming them, manufacturing labor 
of Europe migrating here. 

With reverse conditions from what has been, New 
York would have reaped untold more wealth, and the 
valuation of all her property would be worth much more 
than exists at present, and there would be no perpetual 
debt of usury to those in Europe, owning liens on this 
wealth, requiring the toil of New York labor to produce 
the interest for these penalties. The State would not 
be obliged to be taxed for repairs of this State plant for 
manufacturing the State wealth of carrying charges by 
co-operation of her labor. 

New York labor, by the co-operation of its capital of 



291 

the Erie Canal, was able to bring all varieties of raw 
materials to the populations in the cities along its line 
to make Avealth therefrom, but has been restricted by 
the Federal powers. It has developed so much wealth 
by this State combine of capital, however, which has 
been such good patrons of the carrying charges of the 
New York Central & Hudson River Railroad, that the 
State could limit the prices of them, yet make the capi- 
tal of her railroad improvements the most valuable in- 
come properties of this kind in the world. What both 
these public carriers lack, is free trade in cost of main- 
tenance from bounty charges for the sale of their carry- 
ing charges and not be obliged to overcharge on account 
of their cost, to have them the medium of the exchange 
of the world's traffic, and New York city be the Ameri- 
can emporium of commerce, including Canada, if not the 
emporium of the world. 

Organizations of capital for the more economical pro- 
duction of wealth are the glory of American institutions. 
The Federal constitution is but the co-operative con- 
tract for combination of all the labor and capital of the 
many State's industries, under one organization for the 
more economical production of wealth, enabling Ameri- 
can labor to get more wealth with less labor, and to 
protect individual wealth abroad as well as at home, in 
the right of free trade to increase American industry's 
profits thereby — and to save endless toil — securing 
shorter hours to labor — making America a refuge of 
rest, liberty and freedom from all monopoly oppression, 
getting the best wages in the world, hence be the wealth- 
iest citizenship. 

It is for the interests of the great landlord estates of 



292 

New York such as those held by the Astors, to have 
free trade in American capital of improvements from all 
bounties that make them cost more without value re- 
ceived. This would enable them to offer rents so cheap, 
that the commerce of the world would be done in New 
York, instead of the free cities of Europe, because of 
cheaper landlord rent charges, making thereby a less 
cost to those who occupy them, with more profit. 

The only combinations, existing within the territory 
of the United States with entailed successions, fastened 
upon the liberties of American citizenship, and the rights 
of American wealth to free trade, are the political party 
in power, and the imperial, political monopolies it has 
established. These are the prime cause of all the woes 
with which American labor afflicts itself. They are the 
great combination of monopolies permitted to make war 
on, and destroy American wealth and liberties. 



THE FEDEEAL CONSTITUTION, 

AS CONFORMING TO THE MOSAIC LAW OF THE TEN COM- 
MANDMENTS OR CONSTITUTION; AND THE CIVIL 
CODE OF THE ISRAELITES UNDER IT. 

Our forefathers endeavored to cut loose from all mo- 
nopoly traditions of the past and existing civil govern- 
ments, and from adopting any historical political prece- 
dents or models, that had incorporated into them Ihe 
exercise of imperial power for oppression, rather than 
protection, of labor. They saw that these always exer- 
cise control over wealth which no human power has 
natural right to exercise — resulted in a national poverty 
of the very necessities that society must produce for its 
well being. 

Our forefathers Yveve supremely submissive to, and 
sought protection of Creative power, the violation of 
whose law by any civil government, they fully believed 
would be the destruction of that government, and the 
degradation of the labor, that suffered its violation, from 
right. They believed the government they were about 
to construct would share the same fate, if powers were 
given it to permit human oppression, and it refused to 
hear the wail of suffering that rose from degraded, toil- 
ing labor. Our forefathers made it the supreme duty of 
the citizen that he should use his vote to protect from 
injury of property by which the humblest citizen might 
be wronged without redress. 

Than our forefathers, no body of men were ever known 



294 

to have possessed so profound a sense, knowledge and ex- 
perience of the fundamental principles that should pro- 
tect the citizen, through force of the civil law, against 
charges for bounties to landlord monopolies as an in- 
come class, these bounties being only punishments, fines 
or penalties on human rights and needs of existence. 
They had learned how their existence affects the degrada- 
tion, misery and the destiny of nations. How many are 
forced to be bad, who with protection of their God-given 
rights would be good citizens. 

They were American patriots in the fulness of their 
being. They were, by their feeling as such, filled with 
the conviction that the civil law should enforce only 
protection of and subserve human rights, to thereby 
lighten toil of American labor, by protecting inherent 
rights pertaining to it in the wealth it produced, believ- 
ing that profits belonged to those only who produced 
them by free trade in the fruits of their own labor. 

They believed communities had the right and duty of 
revolution as the last resort, if they possessed enough 
public virtue, and were capable of a harmony requisite, 
for maintaining a government only suited to human 
needs to provide the means of life ; thereby to establish 
the power and enforce the civil law duty of protection to 
the production of wealth put under its keeping, from any 
charges on it as penalties, bounties or royalties. 

They believed that labor should not be compelled to 
accept of less value than it produced and should not be 
forced to trade in a market where it could not get value 
by restrictions on its free trade in its own natural mar- 
ket, co-operating to elevate its own kinship ; and there- 
by make the spirit of American liberty no anti-Christ, 



295 

but the great missionary spirit of the world — a mission 
of the brotherhood of man — " of peace on earth, good 
will towards men." 

They believed the Mosaic law, as embodied in the 
Israelitish constitution of the Ten Commandments, to be 
the most perfect guide human reason was capable of 
following ; that obedience to its rule, would bring the 
nation to a nearer knowledge of and presence with Cre- 
ative power, and that the experience attained by obeying 
its precepts, strengthened, elevated and enlightened the 
human understanding in the knowledge of truth, reason 
and justice. It also permitted the exploration of the 
human mind, to unknown depths of Creative wisdom. 
It developed gratitude and submission for its beneficence 
— for its protection through the bountiful provisions of 
sources of wealth, elevating man in his physical, intel- 
lectual, moral and religious education by their free ap- 
propriation for labor — not by restrictions on their free 
use. 

They believed the light of this Presence, illuminating 
the understanding of mankind, would in due time de- 
stroy the rule of anarchy and chaos, and make it sub- 
servient to the preservation of law and order not founded 
on power of brute force, but co-operation, justice and 
equal human rights. They believed this power was or- 
dained to supplant the anarchy of its violation, in the 
form of human oppression. 

No less motives actuated those great men — our fore- 
fathers — of whom we have not retained the just rever- 
ence due them, as evidenced by our permitting American 
political liberties to die out, and the present, pagan, 
anarchial oppressions, resti'ictions and monopolies to be 



296 

laid on the liuman right and duty to labor, and estab- 
lished into imperial power, without consent of labor, in 
their control of American natural monopolies — relegat- 
ing from industrial harmony of co -operate' on and equal- 
ity, to strife and disintegration by the oppressions of 
monopolies enshrouded in heathen darkness and igno- 
rance of chaos, from the Christian law-and-order spirit 
of the Federal relation. 

No doubt our forefathers drew instruction and the in- 
spiration of faith, hope and charity from Israelitish ordi- 
nances ; such as that, in consideration of family tenure, 
the land should be taxed on that family, not on poor 
people needing raw materials from that land to preserve 
life. It was not to become a landlord monopoly so that 
Jewish society should be compelled to pay bounties or 
penalties for support of that family because it possessed 
the land without doing any labor, simply for using what 
that land contained that the possessory family had no 
use for, except to drive off all who needed its use, unless 
landlord royalties were paid. Israelitish society made 
an assessment, in the nature of a division in which all 
had a natural claim, to be taken out of its products in 
kind, as the rent, the family occupying, owed to society 
— the reverse of the policy in power at Washington — for 
those who were debarred the free use of this natural 
provision for life. It made no difference whether the 
land contained large or small improvements. If a fam- 
ily was industrious and accumulated wealth, which en- 
abled it to furnish products cheaper to Jewish society, 
that was no reason for putting penalties on that wealth. 
Such a violation of American institutions is effected by 
the policy of the party in power. It was considered 



297 

very desirable, under the Mosaic dispensation, for the 
family to have plenty of wells that the cattle did not 
perish but increase, also store of grain and well culti- 
vated vineyards. This family did not have to pay rents 
to a landlord, and thereby be forced to overcharge its 
co-laborers — Jewish people — to thereby make them pay 
the cost of supporting an income class. 

Under the policy of the party in power, establishing 
imperial rule at Washington over the several States or 
nations of the American federation, the farmer of a free- 
hold held under the sovereignty of the State or nation 
of New York, is compelled to pay tribute to a landlord 
of another nation or State. For example, a royalty or 
bounty to a coal or iron baron of the State or nation of 
the federation called Pennsylvania. So does the owner 
of a house. So does a New York manufacturer on his 
building and machinery. These coal and iron barons 
can dictate to a New York manufacturer just how many 
goods he shall manufacture, and what he shall pay his 
operatives that live in this house, for their benefit and 
sole net profit, he getting bare living ; and what the far- 
mer shall get for his produce. These coal and iron and 
other landlord monopoly barons are therefore getting all 
the net capital, while the manufacturer and operative 
together, are gradually being ground to powder as ser- 
vile labor, their dust but enriching the soil of New York, 
whose labor enriches these baronial estates of Pennsyl- 
vania, American labor being among the oppressed of the 
earth to-day. Such is the logic of facts. Such the pol- 
icy of the party in power. How then can a laborer of 
New York equip his son with good improvements on 
land in the West, to enable him to help build up more 



298 

States or nations to be stars m the American constella- 
tion, to be free patrons of the products of New York ? 

The Israelitish law asked, how much did bhe land 
produce ? There was no income class, living by boun- 
ties collected out of a toiling class, that was thereby- 
able to live without working their own land, and would 
not let any one else work it unless as monopolies. Those 
that did nothing had nothing, so there was no danger of 
famine from monopoly, although there were famines 
because the Israelites violated their own law, and neg- 
lected to store wealth against famines. The Israelitish 
law did not take note of how large a house was on the 
land or how much stock, but it rated only the income 
from the wealth of the family, by taking a part of the 
profits from the co-operative use of its capital with its 
labor. 

The taxes were to be in kind, not legal tender, and 
then give a monopoly power to keep the legal tender as 
bank reserves, and force a monopoly of credit to be 
currency, yet not good for taxes and contracts, and the 
legal tender to cost a premium before it could be used^ 
as is done by the policy of the party in power, violating 
American institutions it holds in trust to execute. No 
restrictions in trade were made by Israelitish law, with 
its consequent poverty and a perpetual debt of penalties 
called interest, to support an imperial income-aristoc- 
racy. 

Theocracy, or Creative power, was the constitutional 
interpreter of the purposes of the Israelitish government 
— not demon monopoly. It recognized no higher law 
than itself, hence protected, or submitted to no monop- 
olies — no restrictions on helpless man who relied on that 




299 

protection, that would depreciate the vahie of wealth iu 
the hands of those who produced them, for the profit of 
those who were not producers, and had no public duties. 
The Hebrew laws thereby protected mutual equal right 
— not a landlord oligarchy supported by labor. 

It was enjoined, that after the times when kings would 
rule, supplanting the judges, that they were to be just 
in the civil service — not to need any civil service reform. 
The kings were not to appropriate too many horses, &c., 
for the public service — more than was needed for the 
common good, and thereby oppress the people, but to 
so protect them that they suffer no loss in their free- 
trade value — to thus preserve the Israelites, so long as 
they obeyed the law of their protection and refuge. 

The distribution of wealth was adapted to human 
rights and needs. Those who did not plow, had noth- 
ing at harvest time, hence must toil in servitude for 
support. 

Bankrupt laws were to always be in force, to thereby 
conform to the good, that Theocracy — the Judge or 
Ruler over all — required — the law of protection, not de- 
struction. Their execution was not to be fraught with 
overcharges — requiring an exchange of more wealth for 
bankrupt ser^dce of scribe fees, <fec., than it cost to pro- 
duce, and to that extent be a government monopoly, 
causing the oppression of over and unequal taxation, 
and special need of civil service reform, as American 
bankrupt laws have been made to oppress the people. 

Bankruptcy laws were enjoined as one of the greatest 
of Israelitish religious obligations. They were made to 
restore natural rights of free industry which were wrest- 
ed by the civil law of society, or by misfortune. The 



300 

manner of executing these laws was, a discharge of all 
debts in the year of jubilee, and to alleviate any insolv- 
ent condition, a duty was laid on the right of land ten- 
ure by the unit of societj^ — the family — every seventh 
year. It was to be for the use of the poor — the insolv- 
ents and all who did not hold a possession of productive 
natural resources, under the civil law of tenure, and 
were debarred means of the production of their own 
wealth. These laws taught that the world owed every 
man a living who was willing to work and society must 
make provision. All were thus protected by Israelitish 
code of insolvent laws. Every one had a duty to per- 
form, that is, obey the law in all things. 

It was further enjoined, that no Israelite should op- 
press the debtor's ability to acquire profits or capital, 
beyond his means, to pay a debt. Its non-payment was 
not to cause personal oppression and degradation, by 
forcing payment before the year of jubilee would dis- 
charge it in bankruptcy. There was to be no imprison- 
ment of the unfortunate debtor without fraud. 

There was no permission to traffic in slaves or bonds- 
men of their own people, although a contract of slavery 
or bondship might be transferred. A man once a slave 
or bondservant, under the law for debt, could after re- 
demption hold land. His citizenship was unimpaired. 
He lost no prior right of equality by inheritance, only 
its privileges were in abeyance pending his slavery, ser- 
vice or bondship. His rights to use natural resources 
were retained to be used when he became free again. 
He was in every sense an equal, as a human being and 
a citizen. During the time he was debarred the right 
to free use of natural resources, his creditor and master 



301 

was bound to provide for all of his necessities, and not 
permit him to want, any more than the creditor or mas- 
ter himself. He wore no mark of degradation, but in 
case of piercing of the ears, this was testimony, to be 
made the lawful evidence of the desire on the part of 
the slave or bondservant to remain so. 

Humanity for this unfortunate fellow man, if he was 
faithful to his agreement in performing his penalties in 
lieu of his contract of debt, was included in the duty to 
love his neighbor as himself. This was a great deal to 
perform, as the Israelites were surrounded by nations 
whose law was might, in some form of monopolies, rather 
than right, such laws being in accord with their religious 
teachings. They were taught to believe in and practice 
religious rights that only degrade the human intellect 
and debase the human understanding, making mankind 
to be incapable of self-government, and therefore to be 
servile. The Mosaic law was wholly in accord with the 
law of Creative power, and hence tended to elevate the 
human understanding. 

All other nations took their ethics from the ignorance 
and darkness of the human understanding, growing out 
of debasement. They violated natural law as a religious 
duty, made higher than the right of society, which ren- 
dered them incapable of retaining rectitude in the matter 
of slavery, or of civil government in any form. 

Their laws therefore suffered irresponsible, imperial 
oppressions. For example, restrictions on the free trade 
or exchange of wealth. Some mediums for enforcing 
their oppressions were a circulation of fiat, tokeri money 
— the failure to protect the rights of land tenure, to se- 
cure them from inflicting injustice on society by oppress- 



302 

ing it — the oppression of the family relation, the pre- 
venting of the performance of the duties of parents and 
children, and the appropriation by force, of human be- 
ings for the purpose of trafficing ^n them as mere capital 
or property — for the purpose of making them produce 
more wealth than they were allowed to retain as their 
natural right. 

The Israelitish law was so much beyond the concep- 
tions of human justice of which man is capable, even at 
the present day and stage of enlightenment, from mere 
intuition smouldering in his clouded understanding, with- 
out the aid of tradition and the fuller light of natural 
law under Christian development, that this alone can 
explain the fact of the ignorant violation of the Federal 
constitution by an electoral majority representing the 
nation ; although it was founded on the principles of 
the laws first acquired in definite form — the Ten Com- 
mandments — by the Israelites. The failure of popular 
suffrage of labor itself to perfect civil law, so that it will 
protect all human rights equally for labor's benefit as a 
religious duty, has been used to prove that labor is in- 
competent to govern itself. It is certain, no aristocracy 
getting its income from toil, with the agreement it as an 
educated class, would protect labor in its natural rights, 
has ever done other but wrong that labor, and made it 
toil. Labor is learning from experience, the wrongs of 
its own bad government. American labor is learning 
fast, that making monopolies is not protection. 

There is nothing from analogy, to infer that mankind 
in his deprived condition was ever capable of conceiving 
of the Mosaic law — the Ten Commandments — of appre- 
hending that this is the only law of liberty — that it does 



303 

not require, but forbids that a part of the human race 
should toil in endless hours of suffering and fatigue to 
provide for those whom the law of nature teaches that 
they shall not require this. 

Athenian democracy, not being the educated classes, 
condemned Socrates to death, because he taught the 
law of Creative power, in opposition to the gods of ig- 
norant imagination and false mythology, as his teaching 
worked against human oppression and wars. Truth 
rather teaches that while it is day — while mankind is 
able to lay up store — he shall provide it, and have free- 
dom from all political oppression in doing it. Thou shalt 
not serve thy neighbor, only Creative power ; but have, 
and do unto thy neighbor as an equal — no more. This 
is the great duty to protect by power of civil law. 

The Israelitish law did not sanction the bringing of 
human beings into life without the family relation at all, 
and in the family relation without a bill or provision of 
rights to exclusive tenure of natural resources, for their 
inheritance, including provision for the Levites. As 
soon as the wanderings of the Israelites were over, and 
they became too numerous to hold land in common, it 
was apportioned under the unit of the family relation 
by command of Moses. 

Even the childless widow did not forfeit her right to 
this provision. Provision was made for her to raise up 
a line of inheritance, it being the duty of the nearest 
relative of her husband, to be an husband to her, and 
provide for her children to inherit the portion and name 
of her former husband. 

The history of the life of Ruth shows this, and what 
the merciful provision is for her, who must otherwise 



304 

become an outcast, the subject of oppression, and the 
prey of vice, compelled to submit to the vice of others, 
and suffer unprotected for it, as the nominally Christian 
society of to-day says woman must do. 

The Israelitish law did not force to go beyond the 
realm and live there, to get the natural provision of life, 
because of monopolies of it at home ; as the policy of 
the party in power, in violation of the law of the Federal 
relation for the preservation of the right of the States 
or nations now compels American income people to do, 
to escape the inflictions in enhanced cost of living. This 
party says, natural provision shall not be imported with- 
out a tariff tax on it. This is an infringement on the 
right, sovereign with the States before the federation 
and not given up by it. Provision was made for pro- 
tection of all the rights due the citizen from the State, 
but none were taken from American labor of the rights 
he possessed to the profits of his labor by the law of 
federation. 

The only just plea for an exercise of power of assess- 
ment for bounties, was the war power to protect the in- 
tegrity of the whole, by providing a full government 
equipment. Custom duties now prevail in violation of 
the constitution, which forbid importation of raw mate- 
rials from being natural provisions for life. This law 
makes no provision forbidding monopoly of the use of 
domestic natural necessities, but protects that monopoly. 
It provides a premium of bounties for those who make 
a monopoly of the necessities of others, their equals by 
civil law, and the law of Creative power, and says, hu- 
man toil shall provide that premium without equivalent. 

The Israelitish law, developed and unfolded under the 



305 

light, understanding and education of Christian science, 
certainly teaches that those conservative principles of 
equality, liberty, freedom and right to one's [own prop- 
erty, embodied in the letter and spirit of the constitution 
of the United States of America, are those which^it|be- 
comes the duty of every laborer to vote for and defend. 
They are the great modern bill of right acquired^by the 
American nation's blood of the revolution, perfected by 
the downfall of the monopoly of involuntary servitude 
of slavery, by the voluntary consecration of the blood of 
American labor, shed in the late civil war. A neglect 
to practice which, obeying the power of avarice *or ma- 
nopoly, will be the sure means of destroying this benefi- 
cent God-fearing American constitution, and move back- 
wards the dial of time, when all men, by development or 
education, shall come|to know and do right, without the 
force of civil law compelling to this great end of man — 
when American labor shall itself, in all its branches, be 
the educated classes, to guide and protect itself. 



20 



CANADA. 

The great imperial purpose of the federation of the 
United States of America was, to secure the wealth of 
American labor — thus naturalized into a political, co- 
operative, protective union — from depreciation below its 
natural free trade value, by protecting from penalties at- 
taching to it for the license of its free use or exchange. 
It was ordained thereby, that the rights of labor to the 
wealth it produced should be intact, by including the 
profits of production and use, as its own capital against 
any private interests or monopolies that might offer to 
abridge those rights by forcing unequal value exchanges 
— those not rendering equivalent. 

That no internal power favored by the government, 
nor foreign power, can acquire wealth of American labor, 
at less than its full value, is the only political condition 
of American labor, by the unviolated exercise of the 
power of American institutions thus federalized. 

These conditions of federation have been violated, 
however, through political party assistance of monopo- 
lies, giving them political privileges to absorb the wealth 
American labor produces for its own use without value, 
by its own remissness of its political duties to stand by 
the natural institution of labor, to co-operate with all 
who labor, as ordained by Creative power. 

It has, however, by the contract of the federation the 
right to so vote as to enjoy the full liberties the Federal 
power provides, so that there shall be no oppressive 



307 

condition suffered by any member of American labor 
condition, unredressed. 

These are valuable considerations freely offered to the 
Provinces of Canada to induce them to merge them- 
selves as States, and become members of this federation 
or union. Canadian citizenship, being equally capable 
of self-government, can partake of all the benefits and 
protection this political establishment affords, and be an 
active defender of human rights. The federation is ca- 
pable of securing the profits of labor to Canadian indus- 
try itself, which its own government now appropriates 
to monopolies with an even more imperial power than 
the government of the American federation asserts over 
the right that belongs under State prerogative to all 
American labor ; by means of its vicious policy of tariff 
restrictions, that only thereby incidentally protect land- 
lord monopolies. 

Within the federation, Canadian labor can have more 
natural free trade, extending its limits not only abroad 
but over the territory of all the States so federated, and 
with its own resources make a greater variety of sources 
of wealth, redound to its own accumulations. 

It is true, however, that the standard of principles 
enunciated by the Declaration of Independence, defined 
by the Constitution ot the United States of America and 
Washington's farewell address, are ahead of the devel- 
opment of the average human understanding — the edu- 
cation of the age and of the people of the several States. 
The lack of political experience and education, deprives 
labor of the full benefits of self-government, this Chris- 
tian federation of peace and harmony provided for en- 
joying. States have had the incubus of slavery fastened 



308 

on them by the cruel monopoly policy of British foreign 
commerce, to contend with, claiming bounties to be paid 
by free labor to.it. This power of slavery has impeded 
a concensus of understanding as to the best policy of 
protection. The local interest of slavery has only de- 
veloped other sectional, counter interests, never a union 
of interests of American labor. Therefore the lack of 
protection to which it is heir by political heritage, has 
been the result of aims to get local ad-^antages or mo- 
nopolies, not comprehending the duties of co-operative 
industry sufficiently — a large part of the federation being 
represented by the monopoly of slavery. 

This has resulted in destroying the political protection 
of the co-operative rights of American labor, until they 
are wholly subject to monopoly power. American labor 
therefore toils in poverty, because it has been outwitted 
in preserving the rights of political protection it is heir 
to. It has been subject to the wiles of the party policy 
in power, that does not object to some of America's best 
skilled labor having carpets on floors of rented houses, 
if their manufacture results in only poor wages to Amer- 
ican industry, and all the profits of labor or manufac- 
ture go to landlord and commercial monopolies, Ameri- 
can labor being presumed to forget all about it, during 
Presidential campaign sprees, paid for by these monop- 
olies, who occasionally tickle its servile senses by a 
donation of some of their blood and sweat money for 
benefactions to relieve human suffering caused by these 
oppressions — that suffering being placed beyond the aid 
of American labor, because it is so poor and oppressed, 
it must see a portion of those who have nothing, suffer 
and perish in this land of plenty. This blood and sweat 



309 

money taken from suffering American labor is in a very 
small percentage used for technical schools of manual 
training, to teach American labor how to produce more 
wealth, but not to possess it. A much larger portion is 
spent in Europe, enjoying class-rule pastimes. 

American labor, forgetting its duties of eternal vigi- 
lance to preserve these political rights, that Washington, 
Jefferson and others secured for it, has permitted a 
party in power to provide a venal vote to take away its 
liberties. Getting freeholds, which it has been denied 
political right to hold in Europe, when its government 
from Washington has emancipated it from the debts of 
all penalties to support a ruling class, American labor, 
having freeholds, has gone and taken its fellow laborer 
by the throat that possessed no freehold and demanded 
*' pay me what thou owest," claiming the right to exact 
those monopoly rents it was obliged to pay in Europe, 
and emigrated to escape from, and has voted tariff re- 
strictions of a kind that would not protect labor, but it- 
self as a landlord in exacting a debt of oppression out 
of its fellow laborer, the same as it suffered in Europe. 
This American labor has voted with the venal vote, to 
oppress all other labor, forgetting that — in installing 
monopoly into imperial power — the most powerful one 
will be dictator and rule all the rest, and a small fi'ee- 
hold can never get anything but taxation as its lot in 
this arbitrary distribution of property, it contributing its 
share that it voted to be raised out of the profits of 
American labor, instead of getting a share by perpetrat- 
ing this political wrong. 

It has voted to conform the government to accord 
with traditionary practices of such a kind as prevail in 
Europe, governing land tenure. 



310 

Unless the protection agreed on by the terms of the 
Federal constitution, for the liberty of American labor 
to have free trade, and independence from all landlord 
monopoly oppression in the use of its wealth, is recog- 
nized as binding and pre-eminent over the consciences 
of the people, impelling them, as an act of public polit- 
ical virtue, to conform to its letter and spirit ; then the 
federated constitutional, self-government, of the Ameri- 
can people, is a failure and a fraud. Washington feared 
that the people were not educated up to the proper per- 
formance of the duties of self-government. Jefferson 
believed, in the crisis, they would save free institutions. 

The same original right of protection also inheres to 
citizenship of the Dominion, under the British constitu- 
tion of the common law. 

A status of disorganizing, anarchial, partisan forces — 
bred of political immorality, by a generation holding a 
political heritage of liberty, but indifferent to its bless- 
ings, and to the protection of those natural rights per- 
taining to the protection of wealth, secured by a ratified, 
written. Federal constitution, using the government to 
subserve only private interests or monopolies as if no 
constitution existed — would bode no good to a union 
with Canada, or with any other territory of natural re- 
sources, whose citizenship contemplated uniting their 
civil-law bonds for the protection of their wealth, under 
one Federal-government relation, with the pre-existent 
United States of America. 

To reasonably expect the Provinces of Canada to vol- 
untarily enter into the American federation, as equal 
sovereign States, it is incumbent on the American nation 
that enough of political virtue in her citizenship, found- 



311 

ed on the Christian ethics of the rehgious duty of co- 
operation of all industry, to thereby lighten the burdens 
of humanity, becomes predominant in the States already 
federated professedly to protect their great common in- 
terests against alien invasions by monopolies, whose 
oppressions absorb all liberties or rights of free trade. 
This is necessary, to make the union, with all its imper- 
fect protection, in the aggregate a blessing, a harbinger 
of peace, harmony and co-operation among the States, 
and of good wdll to all the nations of the earth. 

There are so many economical, natural-monopoly con- 
ditions, to increase permanently the wealth of both these 
territories of natural resources with less toil to each, by 
political union of the laws for protection of the rights 
naturally belonging to production of their several im- 
provements on natural sources of wealth, that local 
habits, traditions and the feelings growing out of igno- 
rant prejudices of the people on both sides, should be 
borne down in their opposition to it, by the supreme 
rectitude, knowledge -and wisdom of the developed or 
educated classes, those elevated to be above every con- 
sideration of civil service patronage or spoils, and of all 
interests foreign to. the realm — private interests or mo- 
nopolies — with the faith that the greatest political virtue 
is in the absolute equality of right among all forms of 
labor ; that a knowledge of the way to ward off assaults 
on this right, is to know what consists in the Christian 
promotion of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness-— 
a knowledge born only of faith, hope and charity, not of 
human oppression, nor nurtured under its rule. 

To develop a preponderance of feeling in favor of a 
political union, it is hardly to be expected that a recip- 



312 

rocity treaty would do otherwise than block such a con- 
summation, by building up and patronizing interests 
that, after once established as monopolies under such a 
regime, would be a political power to work against any 
further union than a special reciprocity of exchange of 
limited classes of American for Canadian products, re- 
stricting their most profitable co-operative, mutual ex- 
changes — their mutual free-trade exchanges. 

Of course, to plead with paternal-government monop- 
olies made into form of aristocracies of wealth, on either 
side of the line, to unite for the purpose of partaking of 
such blessings, would be the pleadings of the lamb with 
the wolf to drink at the same stream on an equality of 
right, even if it were of the waters ruled by neither. 
Monopolies claim the right, by brute force, to appropri- 
ate all the natural resources belonging to the lamb — 
industry — and then to appropriate its very self. 

Eeciprocity is but an invasion of the constitutional 
conditions and rights of American wealth, in their Fed- 
eral relations, that restricts their free trade and the indi- 
vidual independence of citizens of the States to be 
affected. It is also an invasion of the natural rights of 
Canadian labor. 

The only lawful means, consistent with the political 
rights of American labor, for securing the consummation 
of a political union of the protection of the labor of both 
countries will be, for the present American government 
to adopt the principles of Federal tariff restrictions be- 
fore discussed in this work, to thereby fnlly prove its 
own capabilities of protecting the rights' of labor. It 
must protect the free trade import of raw materials. 
American labor will then import those it can acquire by 



313 

less labor than to produce tliem from its own sources of 
wealth, but not more. This will improve the value of 
all forms of wealth American labor produces, preventing 
any glut of labor, or of products without a home or for- 
eign market. 

This political policy will afford protection to the cap- 
ital invested in improvements of cities, from penalties 
for the raw materials they must have as necessities for 
employment, which would rightfully improve the nat- 
ural-monopoly, co-operative value of improvements in 
the landlord interests of the cities themselves, by their 
patronage of them, also of the capital invested in farms, 
mines, railroads, harbors, &c. 

Such a feasible means of American industrial prosper- 
ity, would tempt the members of the Canadian family, 
to trust the political protection of their wealth under one 
management, that could prove itself so successful in 
business administration of the great co-operative com- 
bine of American wealth for the protection of its profits, 
as capital in the hands of the labor producing them, 
against the oppression of monopolies of all the world. 

The American States claim blood relationship with 
the Canadian family. Their people think the time is 
fast approaching, when the Canadian branch will have 
attained its majority in natural right, and have leave to 
ask, of the common parent, the possessions it is heir to 
by the laws of nature and nations ; that the division be 
made with the parents' blessing, and approval of the 
union of interests, with the possessions of their older 
sisters, making all their interests thereby mutual and 
co-operative. 

The common parent does not wish contentions among 



314 

the members of her own family. Eather she wishes to 
have the blood relationship cemented by common, co- 
operative interests — by political bonds — if this is for the 
best for the parties effected — if peace can thus be better 
preserved, with greater prosperity. 

The opposition, on both sides, will be from cloven- 
footed monopoly alone — in the form of the aristocracy 
of landlordism and other income monopolies, those 
breeding oppressions, pagan chaos and anarchial dis- 
sentions, with sullen submission of a self-consciously 
degraded industrj^ 

Owing to a policy of over and unequal taxation, pre- 
vailing in Canada of the same kind as prevails in the 
States, there is no possibility of Canadian labor ever 
paying — on the unpaid debt of her foreign exchanges — 
anything except raw materials handed over to her cred- 
itor's foreign commerce. It can, with its manufactures, 
never. Its doom of darkness to the outside light of its 
own foreign commerce, is ordained by the chains of 
everlasting debt, taking all its profits to support its in- 
com.e classes. 

Canada is even in a more benighted condition than 
that of her neighboring federated States. 

There can be no good in a federation of two such sys- 
tems, preserved only for the purpose of degrading, from 
the estate of free production of American wealth, to a 
condition of subjection to perpetual debt evolved out of 
servile labor, by a servile condition established to sup- 
port an income aristocracy. It would only establish the 
imperialism of irresponsible power of monopolies, as a 
more galling yoke, until revolution rose up, and marched 
an army to Washington — as Rome was invested by the 



315 

armies of the provinces, because they were plundered 
by imperial power emanating from Rome — and destroyed 
the federation itself, iu destroying its evils. 

Unless possibly, smarting under industrial impover- 
ishment by oppression, the States unite in political har- 
mony to abate monopoly, the dormant political virtue 
of the people being patriotically reasserted. 

Canada nominally does a little foreign trade by means- 
of subsidies making no profit out of it, only taxing her 
own labor out of its profits for these subsidies that some 
private interest may profit. 

All taxation, no protection of wealth from deprecia- 
tion, is the present landlord and other monopoly pro- 
tection policy of Canada, as well as the American States. 

The imported Canadian raw materials, acquired by 
the American federation of industry, must be protected 
in all their opportunities for their free trade, so that 
American industrial citizenship can merge them among 
its manufactures and improvements. These products 
must not be restricted in their free trade, to thereby 
prevent their affording all the wealth they will bring to 
American industry, for the common good that will be 
felt from general individual prosperity, particularly so 
because Canada must sell them at no profit. 

Why should not American railroads and ships have 
ties and other lumber, also ore and other minerals from 
Canada, rather than submit to home-monopoly extor- 
tions, that only handicap them, in the transcontinental 
contest for sale of carrying charges, helping Canada on 
the one side, and the Isthmian and Mexican routes on 
the other, throwing wealth beyond the reach of xlmeri- 



316 

can labor to acquire it — to become the wealth of foreign 
nations ? 

Supposing Canada refuses to permit any American 
products to be imported except bullion and coin in pay- 
ment for her onlj^ marketable exports, those of fur, lum- 
ber, ore, fish, &g., to pay for her imports of tea, coffee 
saltpeter, &g. 

American production of foreign exchange, consisting 
only of money of nations which may be imported into 
Canada free, will naturally again seek the place where 
it is most valuable. It will not remain in Canada, be- 
cause her raw materials cannot pay her debts abroad* 
this money being the only ayailable substitute for defi- 
ciencies. It will then inevitably get back to the hands 
of American labor, through its foreign commerce ; unless 
by a policy of tariff restrictions to be forever continued, 
American labor's wealth is pledged to foreign debt ; 
when this bullion would remain abroad, American labor 
Laving no use for it — substituting credit for currency — 
only to pay interest on its foreign debt for an income, of 
an European aristocracy of wealth. 

If the political federation of the labor of the United 
States of America used legal tender as money because 
being protected in being out of debt, doing a free-trade 
exchange only, and thereby made it the measure of all 
other wages' value, then that exported would not rest, 
but get back to its starting place, because it would have 
more purchasing power than in any other country, more 
taxed-for-class rule, because it would be taxed less for 
class rule than any labor is in this era of the world's 
history. 

Canadians are free to judge for themselves, as to 



317 

whether they will be satisfied to have such a political 
dispensation of their wealth, as exists under the party 
policy American labor so foolishly permits, and whether 
it is much of an improvement of their own, totally bad 
as that is, from the fact that there is no provision made 
for Canadian Enterprise to have unbonded wealth, since 
all hei' wealth is already bonded for gain in Europe. 

In case of tariff reform, however, by which means 
American industry is to be protected in getting natural, 
full, good wages, including profits, in exchange for its 
exports, by the relief of detaxation of raw materials, 
then it becomes able to redeem this money exported to 
Canada. 

Since, however, Canada, with her policy of tariff re- 
strictions on the productions of her own people for rev- 
enue only, und er the blind of a protective tariff, like the 
American, plausibly to give labor employment, will not 
buy any American productions, except money — with 
perhaps a little of such necessaries as coal — her labor 
being from her taxed condition too poor to buy any 
other — those drawing income from the use of her capital, 
spending it abroad — which money, however, American 
industry is willing to sell her for her furs, ores of iron, 
copper, silver, lead, &c., lumber and fish, because it can 
make more valuable wealth out of these crude Canadian 
products, than it can out of its money, coal, <fec., at their 
exchangable value, Canada having destroyed her home 
market for them, that makes them so cheap, and under 
American protection of her own wealth, from all over 
and unequal taxation, so valuable to her labor ; foreign 
exchanges would be in favor of American industry, and 
New York be the centre of the distribution of the accu- 



318 

mulatecl wealth of foreign nations, rather than London 
-and other free ports of Europe, at least for the American 
federation and Canada. 

Canada has made a bad mess of it, not being able her- 
self to buy tea, coffee, &c., &c., she having only money 
and her crude products for exports, but being too poor 
io hold them, but must pay it out in Europe as interest 
on her foreign debt, after making only the poorest kind 
of wages, for her labor in earning it, her wages being 
not only not protected, but taxed out of profits. 

This free trade condition of the States, however, would 
enable their federation of industry to buy back the 
money it sold to Canada, from those Canada paid it out 
to, as usury, getting nothing back. The next deal from 
the profits of this trade to Canada, would be to supply 
her tea, coffee, sugar, &c., in place of money, bought 
with exported American manufactures ; because by 
greater ratio of over and unequal taxation, than that on 
American industry, Canada could not compete abroad 
with the American States, to buy these — her imports — 
but must pay for them in the same way that the political 
party in electoral majority now compels the American 
federation of industry to do, that is, in some form of raw 
materials, or their money product, so far as these will 
apply on foreign debt of exchange ; ever funding the 
perpetual balance of debt, by giving liens on railroads, 
canals, &c., bearing interest. 

Perhaps Canada concludes she will place her duties 
on tea, coffee, sugar, &c., so high they cannot cross the 
lines. That makes no difference. The American feder- 
ation of industry has the free trade in foreign commerce, 
without competition so far as Canada is concerned, under 



319 

her supposed tariff reform, and made all the profit, and 
can aiford to dump this tea, coffee, &c., on Canadian 
bottoms from their places of original export, where 
American manufactures bought them, and decline to 
permit any comity to Canadian bottoms, if she is not 
considered as good to trade with as the most favored 
nations. 

The law of free trade must be observed within her 
bounds, for her own wealth, or else American free trade 
— by retiring the present party in office from power, to 
darkness outside the shades of American ancestry — only 
makes her condition more relatively miserable by the 
contrast and contact, the American States getting all 
the odds, profits, capital in their favor ; the same as 
Europe now does from all the Americas. 

As American trade hangs onto dim life — under the in- 
cubus, of over and unequal taxation, by monopolies, 
levied on her production itself, as a penalty for labor, 
her territor}^ of federation of industry is not the-even a- 
centre of the exchange, for a clearing house of any for- 
eign exchange. At present London, Amsterdam and 
other European marts compete for the profits or capital 
derived from their free trade, to buy at low prices — the 
law of trade imposed on American labor— the American 
raw materials put on forced sale by the policy of the 
party in power. 

The American federation of industry, with ample nat- 
ural-monopoly facilities to do it, must .commission a 
foreign commerce across the ocean to get this business 
done for herself, and look on and read in the papers 
that it is done for Canada also. 

Canadian industry, being also a debtor abroad, there- 



320 

fore cannot hold the money she has been so bhiffingly^ 
apparently self-reliant and independent as to exact from, 
her shrewd Yankee federation neighbor who has wisely 
concluded to be very courteous to her northern neigh- 
bor, and let her — in her childhood of politico-industrial 
infancy of knowledge of her natural greatness — have 
trinkets she may desire, money if she pleases. Canada 
must then put it into the world's markets for sale to pay 
interest on her perpetual debts, leaving her greatest 
problem to be how not to be oppressed with any addi- 
tion to the volume of her perpetual debt of interest 
even ; then to pay interest without taking water at the 
mouth, exhausting all her profits or capital in doing it, 
and therefore being so poor that all her local industries 
are done on borrowed credit, paying an enormous inter- 
est to her banks for that credit — more even than Ameri- 
can labor does. 

Here is a chance for American industry to buy back 
this money, at such a profit, that it of itself would be 
enough to buy all the raw materials and fish the Cana- 
dians are obliged to sell abroad. American foreign free, 
trade is not affected by the Canadian tariff at all, or that 
of any other nation. If it suffers at all, it is because of 
its own trade restrictions. 

These relations, of tariff reform trade of the federa- 
tion of American States, makes American labor that 
much richer, it protecting its free trade in its own wealth, 
through taking Canadian raw materials, and paying for 
them in legal tender even as i. commodity. American 
labor would not use money for exchange if it had it. It 
would use only private bills of exchange for currency,, 
not needing money, because out of debt, only to prevent 



321 

the use of depreciated currency, by making legal money 
the standard of value. 

Canada thereby has had her way, in making imperial 
exactions on her own wealth, by refusing to permit any- 
thing but money pay for exports to the States, rather 
than have free trade exchanges by abolishing all polit- 
ical lines ; because in attempting to settle the balance 
for foreign exchanges, she has received such poor profits 
that her foreign debt is only larger. 

To prevent American laborers or manufacturers get- 
ting any profit, of even equal, mutual exchange, Canada 
has given all profits produced by her own industries, to 
monopolies. She should have done neither that, nor 
given to American commerce, but have given them to 
the producers of these profits — to her own industry. 

This is the j ust political condition — that of complete 
independence of Canadian enterprise from all the world's 
intrigues to defeat its efforts to secure the profits of its 
labor to itself, with the further advantage then of a Fed- 
eral union of all the several political organizations to 
extend those advantages, such as each present State 
should gain by the present union of public interests — 
that would be the natural bond to draw her interests into 
the American federation, after it had also gotten rid of 
itt own vitiating monopolies. 

Some will query, how is it that American money is 
now made by law a commodity and is then sold abroad 
at less than its natural value, as all other American 
wealth is. As before stated it is caused by robbing 
labor of its profits, and by a foreign commerce being pro- 
tected by the present party policy in its doing all of 
American exchanges abroad, causing the prices of all 
21 



322 

imports to be liigher than if made by an American free- 
trade-from-all-bountj-cliarges commerce of direct, mu- 
tual exchange. These enhanced prices are equivalent 
to a depreciation of the value of American money forced 
to be a commodity to pay debts — suffered because of 
foreign instead of American commerce handling it. 

Not a very flattering inducement for Canadians to 
federate their wealth, subject to a political contract de- 
claratory by the Federal constitution to be for co-oper- 
ative advantages of labor with its own capital as its 
imperial purpose ; when those entrusted with office de- 
liberately make a compact permitting private interest to 
live at expense of the public, out of the fund or capital 
of co-operative American labor, and permit this labor to 
be robbed, in its foreign exchanges, of all its profits. 

If America was in the foreign market with her free- 
trade-from-domestic-bounties manufactures, the profits 
on these would enable her to outbid the world for this 
American treasure, now knocking about in the junk 
shops of Europe as a commodity. 

As it noAV stands, the greatest of all political federa- 
tions of industry for protection of its free trade rights 
with the world, to thereby secure to itself equality, in- 
fringing on the rights of no other industry, no matter 
how small — is, for all these great advantages for pro- 
tecting itself against the world, actually in debt at home 
and abroad, simply because it has deliberately violated 
the law of protection of its co-operation, and used official 
power to redound to the gain of private interests or mo- 
nopolies, despoiling its own industry therefor. 

Another historical tableau on the program of monop- 
oly dispensation of power, bewildering the darkened 



323 

senses of the American people, is the assemblage of the 
congress of the industrially dependent and politically 
independent States of all the Americas, omitting Canada 
only, at Washington. Monopoly power very well knows — 
if its 1 ackey, the electoral majority holding Federal 
offices, does not — that the United States of America can- 
not perform her part of any contract made with the; 
assembled Americas, to be executed beyond her realms 
by any application of her grand Monroe doctrine, be- 
cause the spoils of office party has made American in- 
dustry insolyent ; and has delivered it, bonded to Europe 
already, and Europe has in fact the disposition over the 
profits of the inter- American-national trade — by having 
control of the railroads, holding bonds pledged to de- 
liver the profits to Europe. 

The wealth of improvements of railroads of all the 
Americas, is largely pledged by bonds to European in- 
come aristocracy, and this debt is possibly increasing 
—$300,000,000 yearly. They will be compelled to over- 
charge for the price of carrying charges against the 
necessary American interchanges, to draw income ; 
causing thereby American industry to pay European 
tribute for their natural right of life, liberty and the pur- 
suit of happiness, for all their exchanges among them- 
selves, Europe thereby passively controlling the trade of 
neutral nations. They cannot inter-trade without first 
paying their profits to support European income aris- 
tocracy. 

American labor having now a scarcity of free, untram- 
melled, unbonded wealth, because it has sold the fruits 
of the revolutionary war, also of the late civil war, for a 
mess of pottage, cannot therefore turn what is most 



324 

profitable for its own interest, at its own option (no 
debtor can) and will sell at below normal prices, because 
it has not protected its home market — the only profitable 
and natural market for its silver, copper, lead, wheat, 
cotton, &c., untaxing therefor the labor that produces 
them by releasing from mere bounties on cost of pro- 
duction before they can be converted into more profit- 
able exports of manufactures. Its too-cheap railroad 
bonds then are sold in a forced market as a matter of 
course to pay its debts, and to draw income abroad from 
them, to support income affluence in Europe. 

This is what must incidentally result, or there cannot 
be an income aristocracy established in America — to 
" thereby give American industry employment " sup- 
porting this aristocracy, and " to keep it from vice, in- 
temperance, &c." Canada is doing the same thing, 
" only a little more so." 

Here, however, this supposed purchase of these free 
Canadian raw materials, in exchange for American 
money, has enabled the American federation of labor to 
make its manufactures in greater abundance, and cheap- 
er, yet furnishing better wages or more wealth to oper- 
atives and other American industry, by providing tea^ 
coffee, hides, sugar, &c., cheaper to them, through this 
natural free trade system of exchanges. 

As a sequence, a few more products of silver, lead, 
copper, iron, wool, cotton, wheat, &c., are consumed at 
home, making the cost more to European monopoly for 
what it buys of raw materials, because there is that 
much less of servile-labor products on her market, com- 
peting against each other and a few less foreign debts- 
to pay, and a few more American free-trade manufac- 



325 

tures are made foreign exchanges bj American com- 
merce, wrested thus from European control of debt. 

Some of these American manufactures are certain to 
find their way to their natural, mutual exchange markets 
in the tropics, exchanging themselves voluntarily in a 
free trade between producers for American accumulation 
of sugar, tobacco, dye stuffs, lumber, medicines, fruits, 
tropical manufactures of hats, fans, &c., &c., and to 
China and Japan to exchange themselves for raw silk, 
tea. Oriental manufactures, &c., giving their people nat- 
ural employment enough, to settle the question peace- 
ably of Mongolian industrial invasion for homestead in 
America to suit monopolies, but helping thereby to give 
it employment at home as a fair sample of Christianity. 
American exchanges will buy the foreign exchanges 
Canada must have to preserve a struggling effort to- 
wards a Christian status of social condition. 

Under this free-trade feast of peaceful, co-operative 
American Federal industry, Canada, unreformed in pres- 
ent policy, will stand in the same relation to her South- 
ern neighbor that the present political partj^ in power 
has x^laced American industry to Europe — make an ever- 
lastingly helpless baby of it. The American Union is 
now patronizing Europe for the spoon to feed it, reach- 
ing out its infant arms, motioning in speechless gesture 
to European imperialism to sustain its dependent exist- 
ence, well knowing it will not grow up under the coarse 
fodder, made for its provision, into a strong, independ- 
ent power ; but will always be a public charge, its estate 
of freedom, handed down from its forefathers of the 
revolution, being pawned for such poorhouse alms and 
provision as European monopoly exchange will afford to 
so degraded an industry. 



326 

By the political protection of free trade in American 
products, New York rather than London becomes the 
centre of the exchange-world, so far as Canada is con- 
cerned — presuming her traditions will still incline her to 
a ruling and a toiling class. 

America has thus grown rich, (supposedly so) presum- 
ing labor to rule rather than be ruled by oppression, by 
protecting the free trade of her own wealth, against the 
products of any servile industry supplanting it, by sim- 
ply making it free from penalties. Canada has grown 
poorer in the meantime, by taxing the free trade of her 
own wealth out of existence. Canadian industry is in 
fact the loser by this exchange, while American industry 
has added that much more to the wealth of its accumu- 
lations. 

In fact, both Canadian and American industries should 
relieve themselves from the incubus of monopolies, and 
then join hands in co-operative, politico-indusbrial 
friendship and free trade. Even with a Canadian export 
tax, on lumber for an instance, American free industry 
gets all the profit. The party in power wants monopo- 
lies to have all the profits, and American industry to 
have only a poor living ; hence no use for Canadian raw 
materials. 

With a political union of the political protection of 
labor, Canada would save all this. The whole and every 
part of this grand empire of confederation of labor, 
would be better off, from the general, common co-oper- 
ative commercial advantages this union would afford. 

The necessary preliminary is, the overthrow of the 
political parties of electoral majorities in both countries. 



SUPPLEMENT. 

" David Lewis, a tin manufacturer of England, is said 
to be looking oyer the ground at Pittsburg with a view 
to establishing a tin plate making plant there in the 
event of the McKinley bill becoming law. The free 
trader exclaims : See ! " The first beneficiary of this 
' American bill ' ^\ill be an English citizen." All right- 
May more like him, with capital and knowledge of tin 
plate making, come over, open plants, make tin plate, 
and pay American wages to American workmen. That's 
what our people want — employment and good pay for 
their work. And presently we shall have thousands of 
men employed in the tin plate industry, and building 
houses and educating their children with the money 
which now goes abroad to buy the tin plate needed in 
the United States. 

The London Iron and Steel Journal understands the 
situation. It sa^^s the most important item in the new 
(American) tarift' bill is that affecting tin plate. " If this 
is carried the occupation of three-fourths of those en- 
gaged in this country in the tin plate trade will be gone, 
and our employers and their workingmen, if they con- 
tinue in the tin plate business, must employ their capital 
and labor on the other side of the Atlantic." Mr. Lewis 
is only taking time by the forelock, with an enterprise 
which Americans can appreciate. And his action and 
the London journal's admission sustain the wisdom of 
the tin schedule of the tariff bill. Tin manufacture, 
under adequate protection, will in its degree repeat the 



328 

pleasing experience we have had in iron and steel man- 
ufactures." 

The above extract is taken from the Utica (New York) 
Daily Herald of May 23, 1890. 

This statement is intended to be a defense of a pro- 
tective system, the last Federal party platform of which 
says, that no part of it shall be abandoned. It includes 
protection of monopolies, syndicates — everything except 
American enterprise. Tariff restrictions therefore are 
put on raw materials competing with those produced in 
this country, making thereby an American landlord mo- 
nopoly oi the sources of the national wealth. 

Under a tariff restriction system, protective — not of 
monopolies at all, but — only of the public interests, of 
American labor and resident capital from charges for 
support of the government by a tariff for revenue only, 
and incidentally for support of an American landlord 
monopoly, and of interest, on account of inevitable 
debts of foreign exchange ; the advent of tin-manufac- 
turer Mr. Lewis with his skilled labor, bringing crude 
free ore — or tia if there are no sources for profitably 
producing tin in America— is to be regarded only as a 
public blessing. It would cause manufacture of tin to 
be cheaper than it can be under present dispensation of 
tariff restrictions ; or even with free trade in manufac- 
tured tinware under Cobden Club princijDles of free 
trade, which latter would require of American labor 
extra toil to earn the wealth to pay the foreign freight 
for the subsis.tence of British labor making this tinware, 
and on this return -freight ware itself. It would protect 
British labor from all this taxation — by American labor 
paying it, because tinware is an American necessity. 



329 

adding this much to the price therefore that American 
consumers must pay. 

Under tariff restrictions covering only manufactures — 
not raw materials necessary to break down American 
landlord monopolies — made by servile labor, which in- 
cludes that of Great Britain, as defined by the principles 
of protection intended by American institutions, and 
stopping right there with all tariff restrictions on free 
foreign exchange ; crude tin ore — or tin itself if Ameri- 
can ore be lacking — would come in, with skilled labor 
to manufacture it, and produce greater wealth to this 
labor, increasing the value of all home wealth. 

This wealth would then find more profitable invest- 
ment in remaining than to denationalize itself by return- 
ing to Europe, because there would be less charges on 
the profits from its use, for enhanced cost of living, than 
in Europe. There would, from this increased population, 
be a better demand for American real estate or sources 
of wealth, including use of the capital for producing coal, 
iron, lumber, farm produce, manufactures, railroads, 
cities, harbors, ships, &c., for home and foreign trade in 
American manufactures so cheapened. Tin ware made 
by this nationalized or naturalized American labor, at the 
value of free wages, would furnish tin manufactures 
cheaper than present cost or than Cobden club free trade 
would furnish them. Thereby there would be a greater 
demand for manufactured (canned) meats, fruits and 
vegetables for home consumption and foreign exchanges 
and for all varieties of this labor to produce these ex- 
ports. The incidental advantages of cheaper houses — 
because roofing will be cheaper to enable operatives of 
cotton, woolen and all other manufactures to gain a 



330 

point of lower cost, out of the wages American labor re- 
ceives towards an export of manufactures — is one part of 
a great whole co-operative system ; saving all producers 
of raw materials the charges their export entail — being 
deprived of a natural home market by the present tariff 
restrictions — making the owners of land that much more 
profits, which would alone turn the tide, of their labor 
with losses, to one with profits. Losses have become 
second nature so much to American enterprise or labor, 
that a revelation of profits within reach of farmers would 
cause them for a time to doubt their normal existence, 
they have been so outraged in their previous social ex- 
istence, by Federal oppression on the rights to free trade 
in their products. No more so perhaps than the almost 
desperate manufacturer and common carrier and em- 
ployed skilled-labor, whose only refuge has been to form 
combines and unions to retaliate on American labor as 
consumers for being so selfish as to permit any class of 
American labor to suffer wrongs at hands of American 
landlords through their government protection in being 
monopolies by means of Federal tariff restrictions, using 
the Federal combination only for their protection of 
landlord monopolies, to be their oppression only. 

Under tariff for revenue only restrictions — making 
thereby ^n imperial power, over American native and 
naturalized labor, of sources of American wealth neces- 
sary to be used in connection with this otherwise bene- 
ficially and welcomely naturalized skilled labor of Mr. 
Lewis and his co-laborers, if tin is to be worked at all 
within the territory of the United States — its manufac- 
tures will necessarily rule higher in price to consumers 
than they are now. No amount of over production will 



331 

ever make this industry anything but an infant, and the 
cost of tin manufactures to be higher than ever to Amer- 
ican consumers for all time to come. It is true that 
there may be a temporary reaction — from bounty profits, 
to over-production with loss. After that is over and 
weaker ones are frozen out, there must be combines for 
self-protection to hold prices up to tariff protected 
prices to get enough to pay American landlords, to keep 
in the business in America at all ; the holders of govern- 
ment protected monopolies of raw materials however 
getting all the profits, the tin manufacturer and his co- 
laborer getting none. 

This condition will force tin manufacture to be always 
an infant industry needing protection for its own bare 
life at even as poor net profits as labor gets in Europe, if 
not poorer. It is only a matter of time when it will 
need higher tariff protection to live at all in America. 
Because as it is one more employee running after its 
employer — American landlord monopoly — it will be 
forced to take still less profits or wages for its labor, to 
force all American labor to take less than it does now. 
The condition will force it to enhance prices from bounty 
price of raw materials by the greater demand for raw 
materials. Unless therefore tariff restrictions are put 
still higher, importations of tin manufactures will in- 
crease. 

The plea against suflicient protection for manufactures, 
including tin ware, that the margin of difference in the 
cost of the pay roll is enough tariff restriction, is not 
good, so long as the advocate does not recognize the 
necessity to abate the tariff protection of every raw ma- 



332 

terial by which it can become a monopoly to thereby 
prevent American enterprise making profits. 

With American landlord monopolies protected by 
tariff restrictions, if less duties were put on manufac- 
tures, no more — in fact not so many — would be imported, 
because these monopolies would yield demand for boun- 
ties enough to secure a use of their own sources of 
wealth, rather than have them idle. This, however, 
would not in the least help the profits of manufactures. 

Present free trade restrictions prevailing, manufactures 
will not yield any profits whatever in the long run. The 
present tt^riff restrictions are made to protect private 
interests of landlord monopoly only, hence they do not 
in the long run benefit any manufacturer at all, although 
some can still show bounty accumulations made before 
supply equalled demand. 

The protection by being raised periodically will alone 
keep him in America, where he is in the condition of 
eternal infancy, every gradation putting down the value 
of the wealth of all American labor and enhancing the 
cost of living to benefit American landlords. 

If the object of tariff restrictions was to protect the 
public interests of labor only, then this tin manufacturer 
would not need tariff restrictions for his particular pro- 
tection at all. American labor's demand as consumers, 
would then protect him. The whole object of tariff' re- 
strictions for benefit of American labor is — not to pro- 
tect private interests, but to shut out all even free ex- 
change or free trade of products of foreign servile labor, 
because free trade will put down the wealth all American 
labor can acquire, that of tin manufactures in America 
included. 



333 

The present tariff restrictions, that tax American la- 
bor's right to free use of sources of wealth its forefathers 
bought with their blood, will not only enhance the cost 
of tin ware to the American consumer for ever after,, 
more than it can be at present, but that of the use of 
other products of American labor, because of costing 
more for benefit of private interests to produce them^ 
including cottons, woolens, silver, wheat, railroad carry- 
ing charges, &c., which with every new demand from 
American labor, in new variety of manufacture, will en- 
able helders to ask more for raw materials, the rise be- 
ing slow, sure and eternal, as population and thereby 
natural demand increases for these necessities of life. 
To prevent an increase of imported manufactures there- 
fore tariff restrictions must be increased periodically 
without limit, but always against the interest of Ameri- 
can labor and consumers — for bounties to American 
landlords only. 

All this will mean profits exclusively to monopolies of 
American sources of wealth, with greater debts abroad. 
It will cause American labor to toil and earn, in a larger 
amount, the perpetual debt of interest-money to support 
these income classes, while its toil will be forever after 
more, its subsistence less, that its previous conditions 
have made its heritage. 

To complete an imperial policy — denationalizing'the 
rights of the States, establishing a landlord income 
power, making tin ware and every other conceivable 
product higher to American consumers the greater the 
variety produced by American labor, and a lower share 
or wages as the co-operative profits of labor producing 



334 

them, the profits or capital all to go to American and 
European monopolies — there is being engineered a big 
contract for sale of silver to the government, its produc- 
tion being controlled for profit of Europe. This con- 
tract, if consummated, will immediately cause further 
production of silver and all other products to cost more 
to American consumers. It will cause an arbitrary de- 
mand for it which must be met by a greater demand, 
and therefore at higher prices for monopolyed raw ma- 
terials for labor to produce the wealth to pay for it, causing 
the profits of labor to be less. This wealth will therefore 
be sold at enhanced prices, amounting to a depreciation 
of the real value of silver to American enterprise, as 
gold was depreciated following the advent of California 
gold by same conditions, even although it was legal 
tender. Once floated, it will be simply a commodity. 
No servile labor ever uses anything for currency except 
credit, no matter how much legal tender it produces. 
Monopolies own all this prodvict. 

The government — buying this silver and retaining its 
present taxation of its own labor by a tariff for revenue ^ 
only, and protecting its own landlordism thereby — will 
have more effectually established a non resident ruling, 
income class, and a toiling, servile class ; adding its cost 
to the national debt, on which American labor must pay 
interest out of its poor wages of silver with a larger for- 
eign debt, interest on which must be furnished by toil of 
American labor also. This, with the advent of tin and 
other varieties of manufacture, will hasten the time when 
a copper, as well as silver syndicate, will be successful. 

New sources for producing wealth — for instance, Cali- 



835 

fornia gold and wheat in the West, have injured both 
by competition for monopolized raw materials, because 
of a restricted market at enhanced prices caused there- 
by, and depreciated the capital used for their produc- 
tion. There has been no element of co-operation or 
protection of resident American capital. The wealth of 
California gold and Western wheat should have made 
the capital of all the rest of the country more profitable, 
but it has only injured all, by competition, the weaker 
becoming annihilated. It has only enriched Europe in 
untold measure, simply because there have actually been 
less charges on cost of production, by landlord monopo- 
lies. When the weaker has been thus annihilated there 
has been no recompense. 

Monopolies in Europe and America have the capital, 
and control the output of the mines of the world. They 
conspired to produce a copper syndicate. They, as a 
silver syndicate, are endeavoring to use the credit of the 
Federal government to corner the silver market for the 
benefit of private, at expense of public interests. They 
will succeed in a copper and countless other syndicates, 
if only imperialism can control the Federal government, 
for then all the labor of the world becomes servile. The 
same causes have ruined the prospects of manufactures 
railroads, &c., which the government policy is forcing to 
a weaker financial condition, that no amount of Ameri- 
can enterprise can overcome. 

Mr. Lewis needs to be very guarded in considering 
the conditions of manufacture of tinware, with the prom- 
ise of tariff restrictions against foreign competition. 
There is a trap embraced in this same tariff to rob him 



II 



336 

ot his profits (and make him wish he had remained in 
Great Britain) for benefit of American landlordism. He 
may well consider how much in bounties he can make 
before supply overtakes demand, the market being to an 
impoverished labor at high price, which will use a great 
deal less. It is the old bait, to induce immigration of 
servile labor, to rob it of its profits. 



I 



<i 






Library of congress 

029 765 015 4 









_0. ^ S-iuW . 



